^/ 



DECLARATION OF WAR. 

"Let us have war to the knife, and knife to the hilt! 'Lay on Mc- 
Duflf, and curst be he who first cries, hold, enough 1'" — Bailey. 

THE ROGUES' GALLERY. 

"In my home I intend to put the photograph of this Legislature. 
Two pictures will embrace that photograph. Over the one I am go- 
ing to write, 'The Roll of Honor.' Over the other I am going to 
write, 'The Rogues' Gallery.' I am going to swear my children never 
to forget the one, or to forgive the other." — ^J. W. Bailey, to Thir- 
tieth Legislature, Feb. 27, 1907. 

MUCK RAKERS. 

"I do not believe in the muck rake's business, but as long as there is 
muck there will be rakes. The man in public life must not only be 
able to demonstrate that he is personally clean, but must be able to 
demonstrate that the theories and practices for which he stands are 
the best and will result for the best to the masses of the people." — 
M. M. Crane in Houston Debate, October 6, 1906. 




SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 



The Bailey Controversy in Texas 



WITH LESSONS FROM 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 



IN TWO VOLUMES 



BY 

WILLIAM A. COCKE 

OF 
SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 



VOLUME I 



Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! Ye make clean the outside of the cup 
and of the platter, but within they are full of extortion and excess. Ye are like unto whited 
sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead men's bones, 
and all uncleanness; ye outwardly appear righteous unto men. but within ye are full of hypocrisy 
and iniquity. — The Scriptures. 

Was the following written of Buckingham or a forecast of Bailey? 

* * * It grieves many. 
The gentleman is learned and a most rare speaker. 
To nature none more bound; his training such 
That he may furnish and instruct great teachers. 
And never seek for aid out of liiinsclf; yet see. 
When these so noble benefits shall prove 
Not well disposed, the mind growing once corrupt. 
They turn to vicious forms, ten times more ugly 
Than ever they were fair. This man so complete. 
Who was enroll'd 'mongst wonders, and when we 
Almost with ravish'd listening, could not find 
His hour of speech a minute, — he, my lady. 
Hath into monstrous habits put the graces 
That once were his, and is become as black 
As if besmear'd in hell. 

— Shakespeare, in Henry VIII. 



THE COCKE COMPANY. Publishers 

SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 

A. D. 1908 



JUL 21 190a 

COPY u. 



BAILEY AND THE FLAG, 1900. 

"Have the people of Texas sunk so low as to elect for their repre- 
sentative one who sells his services to the corporations? The time 
will never come when they make that mistake: when they do, it will 
be the triumph of the enemies of the people over the virtues of the 
people. If they do, it will be a sad day in the history of the Com- 
monwealth. If they do, well might the Lone Star, given to the Re- 
public in its infancy, be lowered at half mast on the State Capitol." 
— J. W. Bailey before the Democratic State Convention at Waco, 
August, 1900. 

*'MY ENEMIES." 

"We are going to bury them [his enemies] face down, so that the 
harder they scratch to get out, the deeper they will go towards their 
eternal resting place [hell — ?] * * * If I live, not one of their 
kind will ever again disgrace the State of Texas by holding office 
under its authority. * * * j will not forgive them this side of 
the grave." — ^J. W. Bailey to Thirtieth Legislature, February 27, 
1907. 

THE DOCTRINE OF HATE. 

"The man or the politician who cannot listen, dispassionately and 
profitably listen, to criticisms from his fellow men, without a flood of 
anger and revenge filling his heart with bitterness and hate, must be 
very wicked (guilty) or very weak; perhaps both. 'Whom the gods 
would destroy, they first make mad.' " — WILLIAM A. CoCKE, at anti- 
Bailey Banquet at Dallas, June 14, 1907. 



THIS VOLUME. 

Its object, truth; the plan, research; the process, reason; the re- 
sult, information; the aim, patriotic inspiration. 

IMPARTIALITY. 

Thy country and its honor alone consider. Forget thy prejudice; 
forsake thy bias. Regard not men; only the principles, ideals, and 
practices for which they stand. 

Master first thyself; thy temper calm; thy tongue restrain. Look, 
listen, learn; so shall reason reign, prejudice flee, truth triumph, tho 
trampled long, and patriotic ideals be established as the only safe 
guides to civic righteousness. So, also, shall honest and enlightened 
self-government prevail and disappear not from among the sons of 
men. — The Author. 

POLITICS. 

To let politics become a cesspool, and then avoid it because it is a 
cesspool, is a double crime. — No man should be a partisan in the 
sense of one who votes for his party, right or wrong. — Howard 

Crosby. 

OFFICE. 

If ever this free people — if this government itself is ever utterly 
demoralized, it will come from this incessant human wrangle and 
struggle for office, which is but a way to live without work. — Abra- 
ham Lincoln. 

CONSCIENCE. 

Cowardice asks, Is it safe? Expediency asks. Is it politic? 
Vanity asks, Is it popular? but Conscience asks. Is it right? — Pun- 
shon. 

He whose principles are thoroughly established, will not be easily 
led from the right path. The decrees of Heaven are not immutable, 
for tho a throne may be gained by virtue, it may be lost by vice. — 
Elbert Hubbard. 

He who wrongs himself, sows nettles in his own heart. — Confu- 
cius. 

He who wrongs another, wrongs both himself and that other; he 
who betrays a public trust, has his crime thereby increased as is one 
man to a multitude of men. — The Author. 

Graft, grand or petty, is moral, financial and spiritual skidoo for 
any man who indulges in it. — Fra Elbertas. 



TABLE OF CONTENTS 

VOLUME I 

PRELIMINARY MISCELLANY 

PAGE 

Selected Maxims jji 

Dedication xvii 

Prefatory Observations xviii 

Biographical Mention xx 

Antidotes for Baileyism (interspersed throughout entire work). 

CHAPTER I. 
How and Why the Author Came to Oppose Mr. Bailey 1 

CHAPTER II. 
Mr. Bailey's Antecedents and Youth 8 

CHAPTER III. 
Why Bailey Left Mississippi 18 

CHAPTER IV. 
Why Bailey Left Mississippi (Continued) 36 

CHAPTER V. 
Why Bailey Left Mississippi (Continued) 61 

CHAPTER VI. 
Why Bailey Left Mississippi (Continued) 84 

CHAPTER VII. 
Bailey's Early Experiences in Texas — Political and Otherwise 104 



TABLE OF CONTENTS— Continued 



PAGE 

CHAPTER VIII. 
Bailey, The Belligerent 116 

CHAPTER IX. 
Standard Oil Maneuvers in Texas and Bailey's First Whitewash, 1900-1901 ... 127 

CHAPTER X. 
Significant Political Developments of 1906 158 

CHAPTER XI. 
Davidson-Bailey Correspondence, 1906 18i 

CHAPTER XII. 
Bailey's Second Investigation (Whitewash), 1907 20? 

CHAPTER XIII. 
Suppression Methods of Legislative Committees, 1907 226 

CHAPTER XIV. 
Bailey Practices Before Governmental Departments for "Loans" 286 

CHAPTER XV. 
Charges Stated 321 

CHAPTER XVI. 
Standard Oil Exhibits 334 

CHAPTER XVII. 
Evidence Reviewed, Analyzed and Discussed 364 

CHAPTER XVIII. 
Evidence Reviewed, Analyzed and Discussed (Continued) 425 

CHAPTER XIX. 
The Strange Story of a Famous Draft 479 

CHAPTER XX. 
Bailey as a Standard Oil Lobbyist 494 



TABLE OF CONTENTS 
VOLUME II 

PAGI 

CHAPTER XXI. 
Bailey in the Role of an Oil Baron 503 

CHAPTER XXII. 
Bailey and the Lumber Trust 522 

CHAPTER XXIII. 
Senator Bailey as an Expert Dealer in Railroads 544 

CHAPTER XXIV. 
Bailey-Gates Twenty-eight Thousand Dollar "Loan" 559 

CHAPTER XXV. 
Bailey and a Subsidized Press 575 

CHAPTER XXVI. 
Bailey Pleads Guilty in a Three Days' Harangue 591 

CHAPTER XXVII. 
Boss Bailey in Eruption 640 

CHAPTER XXVIII. 
Charges and Evidence Suppressed 658 

CHAPTER XXIX. 
Bailey Vs. Bailey — A Collection of Baileyesque Baileyisms 676 

CHAPTER XXX. 
Bailey Vs. Bailey — A Collection of Baileyesque Baileyisms (Continued) 703 

CHAPTER XXXI. 
An Address to the People on Behalf of the Minority of the 30th Legislature .... 725 

CHAPTER XXXII. 
A Conclusion of the Whole Matter 741 



LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS 



VOLUME I 

PAGE 

Photo of the Author Frontispiece 

Photo of Hon. E. G. Senter, Dallas, Texas 1 

Photo of One of Bailey's Blue Grass Farms 7 • 

Photo of Hon. John M. Duncan, Houston, Texas 35 

Cartoon, 'Miss Texas Smells the Kerosene" 8 J 

Photo of Hon. Chas. H. Jenkins, Brownwood, Texas 116 

Cartoon, "The Standard Oil Giant" 127 

Cartoon, "Texas Reproved 'Joe' in 1901" 157 

Cartoon, "Washing or Whitewashing.'"' 226 

Photo of Hon. T. H. McGregor, Houston, Texas 321 

Photo of Joseph Weldon Bailey, Alias Senator "Republish" 335 

Cartoon, "My Dear Pierce" 335 

Photographic Facsimile of 23,300.00 Voucher 336 

Photographic Facsimile of Notorious Telegram 337 

Photographic Facsimile of $1,500.00 Voucher and Receipt 338 

Photographic Facsimile, Letter Pierce to Gruet 339 

Photographic Facsimile, Letters Bailey to Pierce and Pierce to Gruet 341 

Photographic Facsimile of $1,750.00 Texas Legislative Draft 342 

Photo of Assistant Attorney General Jewel P. Lightfoot 479 ' 

Photo of Hon. Cullen F. Thomas, Waco, Texas 494 

VOLUME II 

Photo of Waldorf Astoria — Bailey-Pierce N. Y. Chop House Frontispiece 

Cartoon, Texas Firefly, "Before and After Taking" 543 

Photo of a Bailey Thoroughbred 575 ' 

Cartoon, "David and Goliath" 639 

Photo, The People's Group, Misnamed, "The Rogues' Gallery" 640 • 

Photo of Hon. E. C. Gaines, Comanche, Texas 659 ' 

Cartoon, "Private Loans to Public Men" 698 

Photo of Hon. JefF D. Cox, Rockwall, Texas 733- 

siii 



CONTENTS OF APPENDIX 



PAGB 

CHAPTER XXXIIl. 
More or Less Poetical - 751 

CHAPTER XXXIV. 
Governor Hogg's Address to the Texas Bar Association, 1900 757 

CHAPTER XXXV. 
Gen. M. M. Crane's Address, Crane-Bailey Debate 759 

CHAPTER XXXVI. 
Letters and Addresses of Hon. Culien F. Thomas 770 

CHAPTER XXXVII. 
Address to the Democracy of Texas, by Jos. E. Cockrell 779 

CHAPTER XXXVIII. 
Judge J. B. Gerald Welcomes (?) Bailey to Waco, 1906 792 

CHAPTER XXXIX. 

Notable Miscellaneous Addresses, Including: 

a. Bailey Supports the Aldrich Currency Measure. — By F. M. Ethridge, Dallas, 802 

h. Bailey's Speech on the Rate Bill. — By Stanley Boykin, Ft. Worth 804 

c. Refers Bailey Issue to Constituents. — Hon. E. G. Senter, Dallas 808 

d. A Native Texan Speaks Out. — Judge George W. Riddle, Dallas 812 

*. How Bailey Prosecuted Burton. — From Congressional Record 813 

/. Jefferson and Bailey Contrasted. — Hon. A. S. Hawkins 813 

g. A Deadly Parallel, Showing Bailey Deals and Dates. — Hon. A. W. 

Terrell, Austin 816 

h. Bailey, the Most Dangerous Man in Public Life. — Ex-Congressman J. 

V. Cockrell 824 

i. The Political Boss.— Hon. W. O. Davis 818 

j. Bailey and His "Doctrine of Hate." — Cone Johnson, of Tyler 820 

k. Our Modern Caesar. — By Hon. E. C. Gaines, Comanche 822 

ziv 



CONTENTS OF APPENDIX— Continued 



CHAPTER XL. 

Duncan's Speech to the Thirtieth Legislature. ^Judge John M. Duncan, Houston, 825 

CHAPTER XLL 
Crawford on Baileyism (Waxahachie Speech). — Col. Wm. L. Crawford, Dallas, 841 

CHAPTER XLII. 

"The Cocke of the Chaparral," Including: 

a. A Quiet, Persistent Prosecutor. — By Frank Putnam 872 

b. Fights Oil Trust Singlehanded.— By Charles Abbott 874 

c. Cocke of Bexar. — Dallas Times-Herald 876 

d. Other Editorial Comment 877 

I. Bailey Threatens Houston. — By Frank Putnam 878 

CHAPTER XLIII. 
Campbell, Davidson and Bailey at Dallas Banquet, 1907 883 

CHAPTER XLIV. 
Waco Anti-Baileyism Convention 894 

CHAPTER XLV. 

Press Comment from Other States, Including; 

a. The Aldrich Bill. — TA^ Commoner 904 

b. The Whitewash of Joe Bailey. — The Semi-fVeekly Leader (Mississippi) • 905 

c. Mr. Bailey, American Honor and American Money. — New York Amer- 

ican and Journal 906 

d. Country Above Party. — William J. Bryan 908 

e. Senator Bailey's Victory. — Monterey News 908 

/. Bailey's Reelection. — Memphis Commercial Appeal 909 

g. Bailey of Texas. — Philadelphia Record 909 

h. Bryan Replies to Bailey. — TA^ Commoner 909 

/. From Bailey's Native State. — Brookhaven News and Lawrence County 

Press 910 

;. Bailey's Misguided Friends. — Atlanta (Georgia) Journal 910 

k. Bailey's Exoneration. — Richmond Times- Dispatch 911 

/. Revolt Against the Machine. — The Lowell Courier 911 

m. Bryan's View of a "Vindication." — The Commoner 912 

n. Bailey on the Wane. — Saturday Evening Post 912 

0. Pierce and Bailey in Stripes. — The American Republic 913 

p. The Reach of Senator Bailey. — St. Louis Post-Dispatch 914 

q. Texas' Shame is a Nation's Disgrace. — The American Republic 915 

r. Senator Bailey on Trial. — Boston Evening Transcript 917 

s. The Tainted Senator and His Smirched Toga. — Ridgway's Magazine . . 920 

/. Press Comments from Everywhere 924 

XV 



CONTENTS OF APPENDIX— Continued 



PAGE 

CHAPTER XLVI. 
Texas Editorials Worthy of Perpetuation, Including: 

a. The Strong Case Against Senator Bailey. — Dallas News 928 

b. Joe Bailey, Prince of Borrowers. — K. Lamiiy's Harpoon 929 

c. Bailey Rich, Reelected and Ruined. — Home and Herald 931 

d. Bailey, the Blowhard. — G. W. Mortan, Cumby Rustler 932 

t. Bailey's Party Record. — TA? Texas Farmer 934 

/. Bailey's Doctrine of Pure Hate Borrowed from Ingersoll. — Houston 

Chronicle 935 

g. The Only Man Who Sees "Nothing Wrong" in it. — Galveston News 937 

h. The Truth About the Bailey Problem. — K. Lamity's Harpoon 938 

/. Bailey Belched Out Fire and Brimstone. — The Texas Coaster 941 

j. The Boss Rampant. — Austin Tribune 942 

CHAPTER XLVII. 
One Hundred and Fifty Contemporaneous Texas Editorials 944 

CHAPTER XLVIII. 
A Fitting Finale 969 

CHAPTER XLIX. 
A Stirring and Patriotic Address, by "Cyclone" (J. H.) Davis 974 

CHAPTER L. 
Judge Yancey Lewis on Baileyism 979 

CHAPTER LI. 
Laid Bare Bailey's Perfidy— Hon. A. W. Terrell 988 

ADDENDA. 
Post Election Comment 1000 



DEDICATION. 

To my fellow members of the Thirtieth Legislature of Texas, 
both House and Senate, who, in the matter of the Senatorial Contro- 
versy then pending, were willing to sacrifice, if necessary, their own 
political fortunes, by putting official purity above partisan expedi- 
ency; to those Democrats of Texas and of the Nation, who believe 
that no party is worthy of the confidence and support of the people 
that does not imperatively require of its candidates, its nominees, and 
its elected officers, absolute devotion to the interests of all the people, 
as against the exactions and machinations of individual or corporate 
wealth for the oppression of the people; to the honest, liberty loving 
citizens of all parties everywhere, who believe that a man cannot 
faithfully "serve two masters," who value truth and candor, and con- 
demn falsehood and deceit, in public men; to all those who believe 
that the preservation, perpetuation and perfection of representative 
government among men, in its purity and power for good, especially 
as our country grows in years and in the gravity of its social, economic 
and political problems, depend largely upon the integrity and fidelity 
of our representatives in governmental affairs, and their unselfish de- 
votion to the exalted ideals of patriotism bequeathed to us by our 
American fathers; — to all such, this Volume, in behalf of those stand- 
ards and of those ideals, is respectfully dedicated by 

The Author. 



PREFATORY OBSERVATIONS. 



Towards the closing days of the Suppression Committee's (usu- 
ally, though inaccurately, styled Investigation Committee) work, the 
Author began to ponder how the results of the agitation might best 
be presented to the people of Texas for their impartial consideration. 
Necessarily no large number of the people could find time or oppor- 
tunity to read the voluminous record involved. Then, too, the rec- 
ord as developed at the hearing, was unavoidably disconnected inas- 
much as the trial was hurriedly undertaken and the witnesses ex- 
amined, not in logical order, having regard to the chronology or 
numerical order of the charges, but rather as they appeared in Austin 
from day to day, without reference to the charges about which they 
testified. Again there was a mass of information that reached the 
proponent of the charges, not conclusive always, of course, but which 
he thought should have been traced to its sources and the value there- 
of ascertained. In addition to these considerations, it was thought 
that a general review of Mr. Bailey's public, and especially his Sena- 
torial career, might be of general interest and be made, perhaps, a 
valuable contribution to the political history of the State. 

At first only a forty or fifty page pamphlet review of the testi- 
mony was in contemplation, but the considerations above stated grad- 
ually developed in the mind of the Author, finally resulting in a 
determination to ofifer this volume to the public. This determina- 
tion was heightened by the final outcome of the Suppression Com- 
mittee's work (and in referring to the Committee throughout this 
volume, the Pro-Bailey majority of the House Committee is referred 
to unless otherwise stated) and the precipitate action of the House 
and Senate, whereby the issues involved were not settled but rather 
intensified. Mr. Bailey's final threat on the night of his so-called 
exoneration, wherein he proclaimed an unremitting political war- 
fare against those who had sought to postpone his election until after 
an investigation, and who then refused to vote for his exoneration 
until they had been allowed an opportunity to receive and consider 
the evidence, also increased the writer's conviction that a somewhat 
extended treatment of this afifair might not be untimely. 

After consultation with many friends of the cause of official 
purity, as viewed by the so-called anti-Bailey people of the State, it 
was determined to issue this volume and the same is submitted to 
the public without the slightest feeling of personal enmity towards 
Mr. Bailey or his political supporters, but rather in the hope that 



some light may be thrown on the past, pending and prospective issues 
growing out of this memorable political and commercial controversy 
in Texas. 

All unnecessary references to Mr. Bailey's private character and 
affairs have been avoided as inappropriate to this discussion, and 
while the Author has not found as much to praise in Mr. Bailey as 
he once thought was due him, yet a sense of duty, if not an impulse 
to be generous where generosity could be shown without a sacrifice 
of principle, has impelled the Author to make such allusions to Mr. 
Bailey's better impulses as the writer's estimate of his character and 
career would justify. 

The plan of work is best disclosed by the outline of contents: 
Much of the Author's Comment throughout has necessarily been 
included in brackets, thus [ ]. 

An appendix has been added, in which is included some of the 
most noteworthy addresses, as well as valuable contributions by 
others — data that could not very properly be included in the body 
of the work, and yet worthy to be preserved for its historic and 
argumentative value and force. 

Necessarily the work of compilation and authorship has been 
done under difficulties — at odd intervals, now and then, snatched 
from the necessary exactions of professional employment and the 
distraction of multiplied interruptions. An earnest effort has been 
made, however, to make the work comprehensive and accurate, and 
to prepare the same in a spirit of fairness and conservatism. How 
well or how poorly the labor has been performed, how many inac- 
curacies have been committed, how much, if any, merit has been 
achieved, must be left to the discernment of a considerate public. 

William A. Cocke. 



BIOGRAPHICAL MENTION OF THE AUTHOR. 



Inasmuch as book readers usually desire to know something at 
least of the individual who seeks to impose his or her thoughts upon 
them, it has been deemed not inappropriate to here insert the fol- 
lowing brief mention of the author, not by himself, of course, but 
by his campaign committee. The paragraphs which follow were 
offered to the citizenship of Bexar County in behalf of the author's 
candidacy for the Thirtieth Legislature of Texas before the Demo- 
cratic primaries July 28, 1906. The matter was, therefore, pre- 
pared many months before the Senatorial agitation arose. The 
sketch referred to was written by a San Antonio lawyer — a Bailey 
man — and is as follows: 

"William A. Cocke is a native Texan, of distinguished Ameri- 
can ancestry. He was born in old Nueces Town, Nueces County, 
near Corpus Christi, September 24th, 1874, and was reared in the 
mountains of Kerr County, Texas. With that same sturdy deter- 
mination which led his ancestors to settle in Virginia and North 
Carolina in colonial days, he left the farm at the age of fifteen, to 
make his way in the world, working long enough to accumulate 
funds to sustain him through a year's schooling in the public schools, 
and after his funds were exhausted returned again to work for fur- 
ther funds to assure his education. In this manner he obtained a 
common school education, and followed various occupations — clerk 
in a country store; harvest hand; school teacher. At the age of 
twenty he had accumulated sufficient funds to engage in the wood 
and feed business in Taylor, Texas, and at twenty-one owned and 
managed his own farm in Kerr County, Texas. 

"He married Miss Brownie Rees, of Center Point, Texas, Sep- 
tember 20, 1896. Thereafter he sold his farm, and conducted a suc- 
cessful mercantile business in Center Point, Texas, until Christmas 
night, 1900, when fire laid waste his business and left him penniless. 
(He had no insurance.) 

"Misfortune did not blight his ambition nor destroy his courage. 
With the same fortitude which inspired his great ancestor, William 
Cocke, the North Carolina diplomat (to whom President Roosevelt 
pays a glowing tribute in his "Winning of the West"), he took up 
the battle of life anew; and with the same high courage and per- 
sistency which won laurels for his soldier ancestor, General John 
B. Cocke, of the war of 1812, he planned new victories. 

"With a wife and two children to support, he moved to San 
Antonio, Texas, February nth, 1901, and took up the study of stenog- 



raphy as affording fair revenue and better opportunities to study 
the profession of law, to which his ambition always aspired. He 
was in the office of Denman, Franklin & McGown until the summer 
of 1901, when he took, employment as stenographer with the law firm 
of Ball & Fuller, and remained with them until November, 1901, 
when he left them to take service with the law firm of Houston 
Bros. He remained with Houston Bros, until September, 1902, at 
which time he accepted the position of private secretary to President 
William L. Prather, of The University of Texas. This employment 
afforded him the opportunity to take the law course in The Univer- 
sity of Texas, although he had been previously admitted to the bar 
under examination. 

"His record during the two years in the University is a splendid 
illustration of industry and ability. On January 17, 1903, he won 
the Gregory and Batts prize, as the best debater in the University. 
On April 20, 1903, he, with his colleague, J. B. Dibbrell, Jr., won 
the unanimous decision of the judges for The University of Texas 
in debate with Tulane University at New Orleans. Judges of the 
Supreme Court of Louisiana sat as judges of this debate. He com- 
pleted his law course and received the degree of Bachelor of Law on 
June 8, 1904, with a class record which placed him among the first 
three or four men of his class. While he was winning these laurels 
as student and debater, he was performing the arduous duties of 
private secretary to President Prather of the University, and thus 
supporting his family and sending a sister to a private academy. 

"He returned to San Antonio in the summer of 1904, becoming 
associated with Mr. Guy S. McFarland in the practice of the law, 
under the firm style of McFarland & Cocke. This relationship con- 
tinued until Mr. McFarland was appointed Referee in Bankruptcy 
in January, 1905, necessitating a dissolution. 

"Mr. Cocke later organized the law firm of Cocke & Cocke, con- 
sisting of himself and his cousin, Emmett B. Cocke, formerly of 
Floresville, Texas. In October, 1905, Mr. C. C. Harris, District 
Attorney of the 38th Judicial District, became a member of the 
firm. 

"Mr. Cocke needs no word of recommendation to those who 
knowhim. His splendid ability, his industry and his integrity, win 
for him the confidence and respect of all who come in contact with 
him. His unqualified success in the practice of his profession dur- 
ing the brief time he has been engaged in the law is a sufficient guar- 
antee that he will represent the people of Bexar County with zeal 
and devotion, if they elevate him to the position to which he aspires. 

"Mr. Cocke's family are not strangers in Bexar County. His 
uncles, Fred Cocke, and Jack Cocke, practiced law in this city for 
many years, and are well known to old residents here. Captain 
Fred Cocke was District Attorney for this district for six years, and 
won the esteem and confidence of the people of this community for 
the splendid service he rendered them in that position. 



"The sturdy Americanism with which his ancestry has endowed 
him does not tolerate the idea of a public servant representing special 
interests, and he does not seek the suffrages of the people of Bexar 
County as the candidate of any faction or clique. He recognizes no 
class distinction in our common country, and believes that our peo- 
ple are all equal before the law! that no man can represent all the 
people who believes that some of the people are entitled to special 
privileges or immunities. He is not trammelled by pledges to any 
organization, nor is he biased or prejudiced in favor of or against 
any special interest of Bexar County. He seeks to serve all the peo- 
ple all the time, not some of the people all the time. He believes 
that public office is a public trust, not a public opportunity to ad- 
vocate private interests. 

"Confident that he is well qualified to represent the people of 
Bexar County in the State Legislature, we solicit your vote for him, 
with the assurance that he will, if elected, honestly and sincerely 
represent all the people, unhampered by promises or pledges to 
special interests or organizations. 

"Mr. Cocke has prepared and we herewith present a brief out- 
line of some of his views on pertinent public questions involved in 
this campaign." 

(Signed) COMMITTEE." 



MR. COCKE'S PLATFORM. 



"I Believe— 

"That we have too much legislation; that we should have as 
few new laws and as few amendments as changing conditions will 
permit; that existing laws should be enforced or repealed. 

"That our State Constitution should be so amended as to pro- 
vide a regular legislative session every four years, with special called 
sessions limited to actual current needs; that the number of our legis- 
lators should be reduced about one-half and their compensation 
proportionately increased; 

"In a law calculated to abolish the free pass evil (nor will I ac- 
cept passes and franks though not prohibited by law) ; 

"That Texas should be put and kept on a cash basis; 

"That tax valuations should be so revised as to remove the 
inequalities and injustice by which some counties deplete the school 
fund at the expense of others, and at the same time deprive the State 
of necessary revenue; 

"That the State's educational and eleemosynary institutions 
should be liberally supported, under efficient and economical man- 
agement; 

"That our educational system should be broadened so as to in- 
clude scientific instruction in mechanical, agricultural and kindred 
topics : 



"That our Criminal I/aw should be made less technical and its 
delays minimized; 

"That the State should adequately compensate its servants and 
employees, thus securing a higher class of service. 

"In a reasonable inheritance and income tax law; 

"In the useful employment of State and County convicts, in 
such ways as not to compete, unnecessarily, with labor; 

"That, our anti-monoply laws, should be faithfully enforced, 
without demagogic blare, which would injure legitimate develop- 
ment, at the same time protecting all classes; 

"I believe in labor unions conservatively conducted, but that the 
public should be protected against excesses, whether of labor or 
capital. My sympathies are with the masses in their efiforts to attain 
to higher standards of life and of thought; 

"That trading in the suffrage of our fellows should be prohibited, 
as a species of dishonesty with ourselves and our country; that it is 
our patriotic duty to vote for and support the fittest candidate for 
office, regardless of personalities and friendships; 

"That legislators should be selected with reference to their fitness 
for public service only; that they should be chosen to represent all 
the people, including laborers and capitalists, alike, impartially, 
and not to represent some one class or special interest; 

"I was asked to make this race with the distinct understanding 
that I was to be absolutely free and independent of any class, faction 
or special interest. I do not need, nor am I seeking a political 'job.' 
Having no axes to grind, if elected I shall have no class or classes 
to favor, nor any political prejudices to vent." 



ANTIDOTES FOR BAILEYISM. 



The short sayings of wise and good men are of great value, like 
the dust of gold, or the sparks of diamonds. — Tilotson. 

Nothing is finally settled until it is settled right. — Anon. 
Hue to the line, let the chips fall where they may. — Selected. 
Keep cool and you command everybody. — St. Just. 
Beware of the fury of a patient man. — Dryden. 
In all things be just; in praise generous, in criticisms fair. — 
The Author. 

When passion is on the throne reason is out of doors. — M. Henry. 

To rule one's anger is well; to prevent it is still better. — Tryon 
Edwards. 

When a man is wrong and won't admit it, he always gets angry. 
— Haliburton. 

When anger rushes, unrestrained, to action like a hot steed, it 
stumbles in its way. — Savage. 

There is not in nature, a thing that makes man so deformed, so 
beastly, as doth intemperate anger.— 7o An JVebster. 

Great talents impose corresponding responsibility; talents pro- 
stituted to low and selfish ends are a menace to any people. — The 
Author. 

Anger is the most impotent of passions. — It effects nothing it goes 
about, and hurts the one who is possessed by it more than the one 
against whom it is directed. — Clarendon. 

Political leaders who have performed the function of clearing- 
houses for legislation, and who while posing as party workers have 
served under a retainer of special interests, careless alike of party 
principles or of public justice, are passing from the stage. — Gover- 
nor Hughes. 

An unjust acquisition is like a barbed arrow, which must be 
drawn backward with horrible anguish, or else will be your des- 
truction. — Jeremy Taylor. 

Deliberate with caution, but act with decision; and yield with 
graciousness, or oppose with firmness. — Colton. 



Patriotic statesmen bow not down to golden calves, nor glittering 
idols, formed and fashioned by the flippant fingers of the mammon 
masters of the wilderness of stolen wealth. — The Author. 

It is good for man to suffer the adversity of this earthly life; for 
it brings him back to the sacred retirement of the heart, where only 
he finds he is an exile from his native home, and ought not to place 
his trust in any wordly enjoyment. — Thomas a Kempis. 

Moral cowardice is the greatest weakness a man can have — it 
is more disastrous than either error or indiscretion. — Bryan's Com- 
moner. 

When a man has been guilty of any vice or folly, the best atone- 
ment he can make for it is to warn others not to fall into the like. — 
Addison. 

It is a good divine that follows his own instructions. I can easier 
teach twenty what were good to be done, than be one of twenty to 
follow mine own teaching. — Shakespeare. 

As with "error", so also with the erring public servant. 
"Wounded" by the shafts of "truth" long concealed from the public 
gaze he, too, in the hour of his exposure, "writhes in pain and dies 
amid his worshippers." — The Author. 

They that will not be counselled, cannot be helped. If you do 
not hear reason she will rap you on the knuckles. — Franklin. 

Judge Lindsey of Denver says Mr. Guggenheim bought a United 
States senatorship. Mr. Guggenheim did not blaze any new path 
when he performed that little stunt. — Bryan's Commoner, August 
2, IQ07. 

Whoever makes two ears of corn, or two blades of grass to grow 
where only one grew before, deserves better of mankind, and does 
more essential service to his country than the whole race of politi- 
cians put together. — Swift. 




HON. K. G. SEXTF.R, 
Dallas, Texas. 



The Bailey Controversy in Texas 



WITH LESSONS FROM 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 



CHAPTER I. 

HOW AND WHY THE AUTHOR CAME TO 
OPPOSE MR. BAILEY. 

That the author was friendly to Mr. Bailey prior to the disclosure 
of his long concealed connections with the trusts, and not one of 
his "enemies," is conclusively shown by the following letter, dated 
Senate, Washington, April 28, 1906: 

"Mr. W. A. Cocke, San Antonio, Texas. 

"My Dear Mr. Cocke: I have received your letter of the 25th 
inst. ; and I will take great pleasure in sending you a copy of my 
speech delivered on the loth inst. I am inclined to think that I have 
already sent one, but that was, perhaps, addressed to your firm, and 
I send you another in the same mail that brings this. [Here fol- 
lowed a brief discussion of the rate bill situation.] Thanking you 
for your letter, I am, 

"Very truly yours, 

"J. W. Bailey." 

While the author has always disapproved of Mr. Bailey's orig- 
inal participation in the matter of the readmission of the Waters- 
Pierce Oil Company to do business in Texas, whether for friend- 
ship or other considerations, still he did not originally suppose that 
Mr. Bailey was paid for said service, nor that there was any conscious 



2 Senator J. W. Bailey of Texas Unmasked '"^' 

guilt of wrong doing on his part. The author was an admirer oi 
Mr. Bailey, though he did not know him personally, and voted for 
him in the July primaries of 1906. He did not so much as read the 
Cosmopolitan articles, against Mr. Bailey, which appeared in July 
and August, 1906, until after the disclosures by the Attorney Gen- 
eral of Texas, in December, 1906. His admiration of Mr, Bailey 
up to the last mentioned date, was sincere and cordial, based solely 
upon his reputation. 

Mr. Pierce's testimony in Saint Louis on the loth day of Sep- 
tember, 1906, attracted attention, and Mr. Bailey's speeches in Texas',, 
together with his interviews in the newspapers during the fall of 
1906, aroused apprehension. 

The disclosures by the Attorney General of Texas in November 
and December, 1906, in the suit pending in Travis County against 
the Waters-Pierce Oil Company, which disclosures connected Mr. 
Bailey in a monetary way with the readmission of that company to 
Texas, in 1900, were a great surprise. Judgment, however, was 
suspended until Mr. Bailey came to Austin and after several days 
laborious consultation with numerous friends, issued his reply to the 
Attorney General on December 7, 1906. Said reply contained so 
many admissions and disclosed such a studied course of concealment 
on Mr. Bailey's part during the previous six years, as to utterly shake 
the author's faith in his integrity as a man, as a citizen, and as a rep- 
resentative of the people. Shortly afterwards the author secured a 
copy of the 1901 investigation record and concluded that Mr. Bailey 
had not disclosed the whole truth to the committee of the Twenty- 
Seventh Legislature six years before. 

About this time, that is to say, about the middle of December, 
1906, at an accidental meeting with Colonel Jot Gunter at luncheon 
one day in the Elite Hotel in San Antonio, and after considerable 
argument, he suggested that the author should resign. The people 
had laid upon the Legislature a duty, under the United States Con- 
stitution, of selecting a proper Senator, and while the author was 
perfectly willing to pass the question back to his constituents, he 
did not think it proper to do so without first investigating the facts, 
and thus enable them to judge of the correctness of his own con- 
clusions. About the 20th of December, 1906, Mr. Bailey visited 
San Antonio, and the author was asked by mutual friends to call 
upon him. Feeling that an investigation was in order, the author 
did not care to discuss Mr. Bailey's guilt or innocence with him, 
and declined to see him. While in San Antonio he gave out an inter- 
view to the effect that he would return to San Antonio, during the 
holidays and deliver an address. In the same interview he said, in 
effect, that all those members of the Legislature who questioned 
his conduct and did not propose to vote for him, right or wrong, 
should resign and stand for re-election. This was regarded by the 
author as a political trick on Bailey's part, and subsequent events 
have confirmed that conviction. 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 3 

BAILEY CHALLENGED TO DEBATE. 

In view of his demand for the author's resignation, and in view 
of his proposed public address in San Antonio, it was determined to 
ask him to divide time upon the occasion of that address. There- 
upon a letter was addressed to Mr. Bailey, and given to the press at 
the same time, asking for a division of time. Said letter was as fol- 
lows : 

"Hon. Joseph IV. Bailey, Gainesville, Tex. 

"Sir: From newspaper comments upon and reports of your re- 
cent visit to San Antonio, it is understood that you propose deliver- 
ing a public address here within a week or ten days, in the interest 
of your candidacy for the United States Senate. 

"Inasmuch as you are demanding the resignation of all members 
of the Texas Legislature who do not propose to vote for you, right 
or wrong, and inasmuch as I do not conceive it to be my duty to my 
conscience, to my constituents, to the Democratic party, or to the 
people at large, to accede to this demand on your part, and in con- 
sideration of the further fact that I have now made up my mind, 
based upon your own admission through the press and your public 
utterances, that it becomes my humble duty to oppose you for the 
high ofRce that you seek to retain, it follows, logically, that I should 
contribute my mite of effort towards your defeat and consequently 
towards the preservation of proper standards and ideals in our public 
service and public servants. There are many honest citizens of 
Texas not your 'enemies,' but your erstwhile admirers and cordial 
supporters, who do not believe that you now maintain such stand- 
ards and such ideals. They reach these conclusions reluctantly from 
your own admissions. An investigation could only add fuel to the 
flame and I suppose this is why you have been silent on the ques- 
tion of an investigation. I am told that this course on my part is bad 
politics and had Democracy. It may be bad politics and it may not 
be your kind of Democracy. As to the politics I care naught. And 
as to the Democracy, I prefer a different brand from the kind which 
would indorse your present civic standards and corrupt practices. 

"Having come to this conclusion, in view of your challenge that 
I should resign, and in the face of your numerous admisisons, it be- 
becomes my evident duty to oppose one for whom I voted and for 
whom, with thousands of others I at one time entertained the highest 
respect, esteem and admiration. 

"In view of the foregoing considerations, permit me to request 
a division of time with you on the occasion of your proposed address 
in San Antonio. This may appear to you highly presumptuous on my 
part, but inasmuch as I am not personally acquainted with any of 
your 'enemies' you may rest assured that my position is not dictated 
by any other consideration than the preservation of the good name 
of fexas and of Democracy everywhere. In this connection, permit 



4 Senator J. W. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

me to suggest that our friends arrange the expense of the discussion 
equally between us. This suggestion is made that each may feel that 
he is not a guest of the other. In case you conclude to divide your 
time with me, it is to be understood that the discussion on either 
side shall cover the widest possible range, and shall properly include 
a consideration of (a) duty and rights of the Texas Legislature in 
the premises; (b) your public record; (c) your professional em- 
ployment while engaged in public life; and (d) your fitness to dis- 
charge the great trust which you desire to retain at the hands of the 
good people of Texas. 

"An early and favorable response will be appreciated. 
"Yours very truly, 

"William A. Cocke, 

Member-elect House of Representatives, 

Thirtieth Texas Legislature." 

No answer was ever received to that letter, although courteous 
in its terms. About the first of January, 1907, the anti-Bailey carn- 
paign committee at Austin, invited the author to come over to Austin 
and help them out in their campaign against Mr. Bailey in Travis 
County. Consenting to do so, the first address in that campaign was 
delivered at the Courthouse in Austin, on the evenmg of January 
2nd, to an appreciative audience of some 2,000 people. Four other 
addresses were made by the author in the county and on the fifth 
of January Mr. Bailey was defeated in the primaries by a majority 
of something less than two hundred votes. Mr. Bailey brought 
many "boosters" from distant parts of the state, and State Senator 
A. P. Barrett, of Bonham, acted as one of his lieutenants, handling 
a part of the campaign (slush) fund. Many of the citizens of 
Austin thought money was spent illegitimately. This much is cer- 
tain: The only wards in the city of Austin giving Mr. Bailey a 
majority were those in which the worst citizenship predominates. 
He lost the more intelligent voting boxes in the city by a vote 
of about three to one. 

On Sunday, the sixth of January, 1907, the author first met Sen- 
ator E. G. Senter, of Dallas County, at the Avenue Hotel in Austin. 
We walked up Eighth Street to the Fire Engine House late in the 
afternoon and there conversed over the situation about an hour. 
The next morning Senator Senter and Judge John M. Duncan met in 
the author's room at the Sutor Hotel and went over the situation 
pretty carefully. The first formal caucus was held Tuesday night 
in the office of John Shelton, Esq., at which there were present 
about a dozen persons favorable to a thorough investigation. Among 
those present the author remembers Bell of Limestone, Cable, Camp, 
Johnson, Duncan, Gaines, James and Senators Greer, Grinnan and 
Senter. Mr. Senter was selected as chairman of our caucus and 
the author secretary. After that we met frequently while the Dun- 
can resolution was under consideration by the House. The spirit 



The Political Lifc-Slory of a Fallen Idol 5 

prevalent at these meetings was one demanding not a persecution of 
Mr. Bailey, but a thorough and impartial investigation. 

When the Duncan resolution failed to pass the House, and was 
substituted by the Kennedy substitute, it became necessary for some 
one to file charges, or else the proposed investigation would fail. 
During the course of the discussion of the Duncan resolution, Mr. 
McConnell, of Palo Pinto County, who was supporting the substi- 
tute, in a coatless speech, called the supporters of the Duncan resolu- 
tion "cowardly poltroons." His charge was that none of us had 
the courage to file specific charges and father them. The author 
was sitting near the gentleman and determined at that moment that 
he would personally file the charges if that course should become 
neccessary to protect the good name of Texas from the dishonor 
and shame cast upon it by an unfaithful public servant. 

Mr. Bailey and his advisers did everything in their power to 
avoid any sort of an investigation. Failing in that, they grad- 
ually amended their substitute resolution until they could get 
enough votes to insure its adoption, as against the Duncan resolution. 
The substitute called for specific charges and neither Mr. Bailey nor 
his partisan supporters expected anyone to assume such a respon- 
sibility. 

The charges were prepared, and that without suggestion or as- 
sistance from anyone. Of course, the author's information was 
gathered from time to time in conversations and from documents 
and letters available in the discussions leading up to the investiga- 
tion. No one, however, read the charges before they were filed, 
except, of course, the stenographer who wrote them. Prior to the 
meeting of the Thirtieth Legislature the author had never met a 
single one of Mr. Bailey's so-called "enemies," either in or out of 
Texas. His opposition in this matter was taken entirely independ- 
ent of any other consideration or influence than a conviction of 
duty. The committee forced a trial of the charges in two or three 
days after they were filed. 

Concerning Mr. Bailey's oft-repeated complaint that his 
"enemies" should have brought his improper conduct and relations 
to the attention of the people of Texas before the Democratic 
primaries, July 28, 1906, the following signed letters to the author 
from the leaders who were active in the campaign against Mr. Bailey 
after Pierce testified in St. Louis, September 10, 1906, and after the 
publication of Waters-Pierce records during the last days of Novem- 
ber, 1906, are important. They show conclusively that these 
leaders did not know the facts prior to the Democratic primaries. 
The letters follow: 

From Hon. H. F. Ring, president Harris County Good Gov- 
ernment Club, Houston, Texas, September 6, 1907: 

"Replying to your favor of the 4th inst., will say that T never 
learned of the facts disclosed by the Attorney General's publication 



6 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

of the vouchers relative to Senator Bailey until the same were pub- 
lished. 1 had no previous knowledge of the facts thus disclosed." 

From M. M. Crane, ex-Attorney General of Texas. Dallas, 
Texas, September 5, 1907: 

"Answering yours of recent date, I beg to say that I never knew 
anything of Mr. Bailey's financial transactions with the oil com- 
pany and other public service corporations until the testimony of H. 
Clay Pierce, given at St. Louis, was printed in the daily papers 
[September 10, 1906] and I heard no details then and never ascer- 
tained any of the details until the Attorney General gave notice to 
the oil company to produce the vouchers in which Mr. Bailey's 
name figured." 

From Hon. O. P. Bowser, ex-State Senator, Dallas, Texas, Sep- 
tember 12, 1907: 

"Replying to yours of the 4th inst., I beg to say I knew nothing 
of Mr. Bailey's association with Mr. Pierce until August or Sep- 
tember, after the primaries of last year, nor of his negotiation with 
the Standard Oil Company until Pierce's testimony in the Missouri 
case. As to the vouchers, I knew nothing of those until they were 
made public by the Attorney General of Texas, sometime the latter 
part of November." 

From F. M. Ethridge, Esq., of Dallas, September 9, 1907: 

"Replying to yours of the 4th inst., beg to say that the first inti- 
mation I had of Bailey's negotiations with H. C. Pierce was when the 
testimony of the latter, given in St. Louis, was published in the 
public prints. I first learned of the facts disclosed by the Attorney 
General's publication of the vouchers during the last days of Novem- 
ber, 1906, from that publication itself." 

From Hon. J. E. Cockrell, Dallas, Texas, September 16, 1907: 

"You asked in your last letter when I first knew of the facts with 
reference to Senator Bailey, developed in the correspondence between 
him and Attorney General Davidson. In reply, I beg to say that 
I knew nothing of these matters until the correspondence, as pub- 
lished in the newspapers, developed them." 

From Hon. E. G. Senter, State Senator, Dallas, Texas, Septem- 
ber 13, 1907: 

"Replying to your inquiry of the 4th inst., I beg to say that I 
first learned of the dealings of Senator Bailey with Pierce and the 
Waters-Pierce Oil Company through the published correspondence 
between him and the attorney general. I voted for Bailey in the 
primaries. My confidence in him was first shaken by his own 
admissions." 



w 
c 




^ ij ^ 



■5 .^ 



PI 



^o'C 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 7 > 

On January 5, 1907, Attorney General Davidson gave an open 
statement to the public press of Texas wherein he used the following 
language concerning the Bailey-Waters-Pierce record: "2. I learned 
of the existence of these documents about Aug. 25, 1906, and came 
into possession of them on Nov. 17, 1906. I never called on defend- 
ant to produce a single document which I had in my possession." 



8 Senator J. W. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

CHAPTER II. 
MR. BAILEY'S ANTECEDENTS AND YOUTH. 

While the great civil war was yet unfolding its bloody drama, 
on October 6th, 1862, in the town of Crystal Springs, Copiah County, 
Mississippi, there was born a now notorious American character. 
His star of destiny was to guide him from an uncouth and an un- 
cultured atmosphere to the high pinnacle of fame, fortune and 
renown — from the environs of a liquor saloon to the exalted station 
of a United States Senator — from the role of a barroom bully to the 
dispenser of political influence for commercial pottage. 

His career was to be marked by the one time love and un- 
bounded admiration of a confiding people; as it was to close in 
shame and oblivion. By nature gifted beyond the lot of the aver- 
age man, his brilliancy was to shine forth resplendently. If to the 
strength of intellect there had been added, in nature's mixing, the 
tender graces of gentleness and generosity, than he would have been 
few more worthy or renowned. 

If self-love, self-indulgence, inordinate ambition, greed of gold, 
and lust for power had not swayed his very life, a patriot he might 
have been of large proportions, and of usfulness unbounded. Sel- 
fishness, self-conceit, and self-seeking, however, dwarfed his soul, 
absorbed his strength, misguided his efforts, beclouded his vision, 
destroyed his usefulness, blasted his hopes, embittered his heart, 
encompassed his career, withered his life, wrought his ruin utter! 

What a lesson this to younger and less able men of his day and 
generation. "Proof this, beyond all lingering doubt, that not in 
mental, but in moral worth did God excellence place and meant it 
evermore there to dwell. To seek it else, as well seek mellow grapes 
'neath icy poles, seek blooming roses on the cheek of death, seek im- 
mortality in a world of fleeting shades." 

It is far more agreeable to commend than to condemn a public 
servant or a private citizen; it is equally more pleasant to praise 
than to censure. The muckrake business is as disagreeable as the 
necessity for the existence of the muckraker is unfortunate. It 
has been truly said, however, "as long as there is muck, there will 
be rakes" — and there should be. 

The preservation of modern industrial and economic freedom to 
a self-governing people, no less than their ancient and historic polit- 
ical liberty, depends, now and always, upon "eternal vigilance." 
In a representative government, the perpetuity of political and com- 
mercial independence must largely rest upon the fidelity and integrity 
of our representative men. In a limited democracy, such as ours, 
the masses can act only through their chosen representatives, state 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 9 

and national, and when these representatives lose the viewpoint of 
the people they remain not the delegated servants of the people, but 
become the paid tools of the enemies of the people, to-vvit, tlie self- 
ish, oppressive interests — the system. 

In times of peace there are always afloat upon the high seas of 
commerce, pirates and freebooters. If the substance of the masses 
be ransacked and appropriated by these lawless devourers, to that 
extent is honest toil robbed of its reward and labor deprived of 
its sustenance. 

If our public men cannot be relied upon to not only enact laws, 
but to aid in their vigilant enforcement, against the brigands of com- 
merce, or the pirates of the ocean of graft (Standard Oil graft, if 
you please), then is representative government a mockery and our 
boasted self-government a pretense, a sham and a delusion. 

When our public servants give aid and comfort to tlie enemies of 
the people, in their crusade against the commercial independence 
and liberty of the people, then it becomes the solemn duty of every 
citizen, whether public or private, to denounce their unfaitliful public 
men as traitors to their country. For one, so long as there burns 
within the author's bosom a spark of love for this, his native state, 
or a scintilla of devotion to the best interests and highest ideals of his 
beloved country, he will denounce them; and this, too, though it 
should drive from him every hope of political preferment forever! 

The private citizen or the public servant who remains silent when 
the institutions of his country are being slowly undermined and the 
historic ideals of his country are being shattered, is recreant to his 
duty. The man who sacrifices his political independence and honor 
to political expediency and dishonor, is to that extent a political 
coward and politically dishonest. A patriot, therefore, should "hew 
to the line, let the chips fall where they may." 

It has been said that there is no history like biography. It would 
be impossible to intelligently review the political history of Texas 
during the past fifteen years, and especially during the last seven 
years, without extended reference to one of her United States Sena- 
tors, concerning whose conduct and whose character there has been 
and now is a wide diversity of opinion. Mr. Bailey's public career 
cannot be well understood except by careful inquiry into the char- 
acter and antecedents of the man. 

The observations contained in this volume have been inspired by 
no other desire than to reach a fair and impartial estimate of the 
man in his public capacity. This cannot be done, however, without 
some inquiry into the manner of man whose characteristics and whose 
public conduct is under connsideration. In short, a character study 
is essential to an accurate estimate and an impartial conclusion. To 
this end some brief references to Mr. Bailey's antecedents and youth 
have been thought, not only permissible, but appropriate. 

It has been stated on many occasions, and the statement has been 
used for political effect in the South, that Mr. Bailey's father was 



10 Senator J. W. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

a Southern man and a Confederate soldier. As a matter of fact, the 
elder Bailey was a Pennsylvanian by birth and raising— at least he 
emigrated from Pennsylvania to Mississippi just before the civil 
war, in the employ of his uncles, the Weldon brothers. The latter 
firm was engaged as contractors and builders and Mr. Bailey's 
father was employed by them as a mechanic. In the language of a 
distinguished Mississippian: "The elder Bailey continued in the 
employ of his Weldon uncles until the civil war was well under 
way, and then he became engaged with them, or independently^ of 
them, in the construction department of the Confederate service, 
and is said never to have been actively enlisted or engaged as a soldier 
in the ranks. Three or four years after the civil war closed he went 
into the liquor saloon business in Crystal Springs, and continued in 
this business until finally forced out by law and an aroused moral sen- 
timent of the people of Copiah County, during the '8o's. The sev- 
eral old citizens with whom I talked all agreed without exception 
that Joe Bailey's father's reputation during his entire life at Crystal 
Springs was bad, bad, bad. Colonel W. S. Willing, an old lavvyer 
of the place, says the records of the mayor's court in Crystal Springs 
and of the circuit court in Hazelhurst, the county seat, bear ample 
evidence, extending over many years, of the old man's devious ways." 
Mr. Bailey, however, should not be held responsible for the con- 
duct of his father, and it is to be said to his credit that he himself 
rose from the discouraging atmosphere of vulgar rowdyism to great 
prominence. It is extremely unfortunate, albeit, that he should have 
retained, up to this good hour, much of the viciousness, brutality and 
vulgarity incident to his antecedents and youth. While proper 
allowances should be made for the weaknesses of human nature, 
Mr. Bailey's later opportunities for the highest and most cultured 
accomplishment have been such as would have subdued and refined 
any other than the coarsest nature. 

Our correspondent continues: "Young Joe's reputation up to 
the time he started to school at Mississippi College (at Clinton, 
Miss.) in the winter of 1878-79, at the age of seventeen, was likewise 
very bad. He was raised in the atmosphere of his father's saloon 
and served as barkeeper quite regularly from the time he was large 
enough until he started to school. There are a number of very dis- 
reputable stories about both Joe and his father which I will not par- 
ticularize. I have interviewed several of the old citizens of Crystal 
Springs who knew the Baileys well, and Joe from his infancy. All 
of these agree that Joe was born in 1862 instead of 1863, ^s appears 
in the Congressional Directory, and all stated that his name was 
Joseph E., and that he afterwards changed it to Joseph IF. 

As to Mr. Bailey's real age, it would appear that he was born 
October 6th, 1862, although he seems to have given his birth as 
October 6th, 1863. He has frequently boasted of the alleged fact 
that he was nominated as an elector on the Cleveland ticket in 1884, 
before he was twenty-one years of age in the fall of that year. If he 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 11 

was born in 1862 he was, in fact, nearly twenty-two years old at the 
time of his boasted distinction. This is a small matter, but little 
things count in the make-up of character, and the author is disposed 
to believe that he deliberately misrepresented the fact for this insig- 
nificant distinction — he has done many things quite as foolish since. 
Certain it is that he has frequently indulged in self-praise with ref- 
erence to his having acted as an elector, but he has, with equal stu- 
diousness and duplicity, avoided referring to the fact that he was 
defeated by the Democrats of Copiah County as a candidate for the 
Mississippi Legislature before leaving Mississippi. 

But let us return to some interesting incidents of his youth. His 
mother was Miss Harriet M. Dees. Joe was their second child and 
their only son, except one, who died in infancy. There were four 
sisters, one older and three younger than himself. 

While Bailey was employed in his father's saloon he bought a 
chance at a horse and buggy that was being raffled off in the town, 
and this incident led to the beginning of an interesting career. "Joe 
Bailey already had one one-dollar ticket for this raffle," says our 
informant, "and when the time came for it to take place a tough 
character of the town who had taken a chance and had not paid for 
it was missing. Joe bought his chance so that the raffle might pro- 
ceed, and this happened to be the number that won the horse and 
buggy, which was promptly sold for one hundred and fifty dollars 
in cash and furnished Joe what money he needed until his rich 
uncle (being William Weldon, his grand uncle) was enlisted in his 
behalf. All of these statements can be substantiated by old citizens 
of Crystal Springs." 

It seems that Joe was persuaded by some of his acquaintarices to 
embrace this opportunity for further educational development, and 
he entered the Mississippi College, at Clinton, Miss., in the fall of 
1878. This was a Baptist school, and according to a statement made 
to the author by one of his associates there, "the moral and religious 
atmosphere was too dense for Joe, and in consequence he remained 
at this college only a few months." 

While the author is not well informed as to the details of his 
career at this college, the following interesting and significant rem- 
iniscences, amopg others, are told concerning the future United 
States Senator from Texas. On one occasion he became very violent 
in a debate, in which he severely and in an ungentlemanly manner 
abused a fellow student from his own county, because said student 
in the course of the debate, took occasion to criticise certain political 
conditions with reference to which he and Joe differed. 

In this connection, the following reminiscence by a prominent 
Mississippian is illuminating: "The first time I ever saw Bailey 
to know him was at a meeting of the Philoneathean Society, one of 
the two debating societies of Klississippi College, at Clinton, Miss., 
during the college session of 1878- 1879. The session opened un- 
usually late in 1878 on account of the awful yellow fever epidemic 



12 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

which scourged portions of Louisiana, Mississippi and Tennessee 
that year. Bailey was one of the new students of that session, arriv- 
ing a little while before, or just after the Christmas holidays. It 
was the custom for nearly every college student to join either the 
Philoneathean or the Hermenian Society soon after his arrival. 
Bailey chose to join the former, of which I was already a member, 
and which society I had represented at the opening of the session 
as its Fall Orator. 

"The night I first saw him he was not on the regular debate, and 
my recollection is that it was the first time he had ever attended a 
meeting of the society. My attention was specially attracted to him 
by the rough and vicious way, during the irregular debate, in which 
he attacked a young fellow-student from his own county by the name 
of E. M. Barber. Barber was one of the members of the society 
who had been previously appointed as one of the speakers on the 
regular debate. During his discussion of the subject in hand (which 
was a semi-political one) he deplored and condemned ballotbox 
stuffing and fraudulent election methods as demoralizing, dangerous 
and subversive of republican institutions. He referred also to some 
of these evil practices that had come to his notice in his own County 
of Copiah. At that time there was in the western portion of Copiah 
County a voting precinct known by the unique but unromantic name 
of "Tail-holt." Tail-holt had an ugly habit of giving large repub- 
lican majorities, and whenever the election in Copiah was likely to 
be close there was reputed to be a 'democratic mule' around Tail-holt 
that always ate up the ballot box and its contents before the returns 
were sent in. It was probably Barber's irreverent reference to that 
'democratic mule' that aroused Bailey's indignation and caused him 
to reply to Barber, when the time for irregular debate arrived, and 
to denounce him in almost unmeasured terms. 

"The two things which specially impressed me about Bailey at 
that time were the domineering, bulldozing spirit which has since 
become so characteristic of him, and his apparent utter lack of moral 
perception or conviction. The main point of his young fellow coun- 
tryman's speech was never seen or appreciated by him. 

"Even at that early stage of his career, however, though his deliv- 
ery was halting and jerky, Bailey, nevertheless, displayed some of the 
oratorical ability for which he has since become noted. 

"In less than five years from the time of the debating society inci- 
dent just described, Joe Bailey took a leading part in the famous 
bulldozing campaign in Copiah County which culminated in a cold- 
blooded political assassination, and just ten years from the Barber- 
Bailey incident at college, Senator J. G. George, Mississippi's great 
Commoner, was making an active canvass of the state, appealing for 
a constitutional convention which might correct the demoralizing 
and corrupting political practices which Barber condemned and 
which Bailey so violently defended, even to the point of personal 
denunciation of his fellow-student from Copiah County," 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 13 

At another time it seems that Joe acted as teller in an election of 
officers for the debating society, and as such was openly charged by 
a fellow member of the society with having cheated by fraudulently 
counting his man in. This raised a "rough-house." Pistols and 
knives were flourished freely and serious difficulty narrowly averted. 

The author has in his possession signed letters from gentlemen 
resident in Mississippi who attended Mississippi College at Clinton 
with Mr. Bailey, from which the following interesting excerpts are 
taken: "This was the first institution in the way of a college that 
Joe Bailey ever attended, and he entered there during the session of 
1878-79, shortly after the term opened, which was not very long 
before Christmas that year, on account of the terrible yellow fever 
epidemic which visited Mississippi in the summer and fall of 1878." 

In another letter is the following language: "Mr. Bailey was 
not expelled from Mississippi College, but went home for some rea- 
son and did not return. He was expelled from the University of 
Mississippi, as you know." 

In a third letter, all of which letters are from gentlemen of un- 
questioned standing, is the following: "He was regarded as rather 
wild and was not regarded as a good student. He was a hail fellow 
well met, however, and everybody liked him. I was in school with 
him here, at Clinton. He was here only a part of one session. He 
was not expelled from the institution, but had some kind of trouble 
with the faculty and withdrew. My impression has been all the 
while that he withdrew to keep from being expelled." 

After these experiences at this, his first selection of a college, 
the next school year, 1879-80, we find him enrolled as a student in the 
University of Mississippi, Oxford, Mississippi. In the meantime, 
his wealthy grand uncle, Weldon, had been interested in this scion of 
his family, and from that time forward for many years was Joe's ex- 
clusive banking agent, of which he has since had several; among 
them being the Standard Oil Governor of Missouri, David R. 
Francis, and the present fugitive from justice in Texas, H. Clay 
Pierce, sometimes known as "My Dear Pierce." 

Returning, however, to the records of the University of Mis- 
sissippi, and continuing this character study and sketch, it is inter- 
esting to note the following signed language, in the possession of 
the author, from the records of the University of Mississippi: 

"The General Register of the University shows that J. E. Bailey 
was a freshman of the A. B. course during the session of 1879-80. 
Minutes of the faculty of the University of Mississippi, November 
9th, 1880: J. E. Bailey reported by an officer of the institution as 
being 'at depot last Wednesday night.' November i6th, 1880: J. E. 
Bailey reported 'in town last Saturday night.' March 28th, 1881. 
Minutes, page 220, indicate that J. E. Bailey entered the University 
of Mississippi early in the session, and that he left under circutn- 
stances that were not altogether above reproach; going to Vanderhili 
University; that he returned in the spring and applied for re-admis- 



14 Senator J. W. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

sion, having been at Vanderbilt. Case considered at some length, 
calling to mind the fact that the circumstances of his withdrawal 
were not altogether above reproach. Finally admitted on condition 
of presenting a certificate of honorable dismission from the Van- 
derbilt University and on pledging his word of honor to strictly 
observe all the laws of the University and to faithfully discharge his 
duties as a student. 

"The tninutes of the faculty (page 240 in old book) show that 
J. E. Bailey was expelled June 14th, 188 1. The University catalogue 
for the session of 1879-1880 contains the name of Joseph Edward 
Bailey, a B. S. Freshman from Crystal Springs. The catalogue of 
the following year has the same name as a B. A. Sophomore of 
Copiah County. The historical catalogue of the University makes 
no mention of the name of J. E. Bailey, but has the name of Joseph 
IF. Bailey among the new students, 1879-80." 

The author has in his possession data from the records of Van- 
derbilt University, showing that "Joseph E. Bailey attended that 
institution for a short time during 1881." One of the present pro- 
fessors of Vanderbilt University, who was a student of that institu- 
tion with Mr. Bailey, says that he "knew Mr. Bailey as Joe, and as 
to his other initial he did not know; that he (Bailey) was asfied by 
the Chancellor to retire, after he had been there only thirty days." 
The reason he was unable to assign. 

From the above it is very plain that Joe was having great dif- 
ficulty in remaining at any institution of learning longer than a very 
few months at a time. Having barely been re-admitted to the Uni- 
versity of Mississippi, March 28th, 1881, after his forced withdrawal 
from Vanderbilt, he was finally and formally expelled from the Uni- 
versity of Mississippi June 14th, 1 88 1. "There can be no doubt, 
whatever," writes the present president of the Mississippi Press Asso- 
ciation, in a personal letter to the author, "about Joseph JF. and J. E. 
Bailey being one and the same individual. The exact date when he 
substituted the JF for the E in his name is not easily ascertainable, but 
the weight of circumstance and testimony, as far as I can gather, is 
that it was done sometime between his expulsion from the University 
of Mississippi and his graduation in law at Lebanon, Tennessee, at 
Lebanon Law school, which he attended for the session of 1882-83, 
where he was registered as Joseph W. Bailey, Crystal Springs, Mis- 
sissippi." 

In the meantime, however, he had attended the University of 
Virginia for a short time, during the sessions of 1881-82, where he 
was registered as Joseph Edgar Bailey, from Crystal Springs, Miss. 
At that institution he pursued courses in law, Latin and Greek, but 
"it does not appear that Mr. Bailey passed his examinations in these 
courses," says a letter in the possession of the author, from the Reg- 
istrar of the institution. "In December, 1881, Mr. Bailey was re- 
ferred to the professors concerned for admonition on account of 
unexcused absences," continues this communication. In a conversa- 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 15 

tion between an alumnus of the university and the author, the former 
related the following circumstance attending Joe's abrupt departure 
from this historic seat of learning. It seems that Joe became in- 
volved in a heated argument with his associate college debaters con- 
cerning the selection of a subject for a proposed college debate. The 
narrator said that all the interested debaters preferred a given sub- 
ject, except Joe, who contended for the selection of the one of his 
choice. Failing in the accomplishment of his "own sweet will," this 
intellectual prodigy of the South, with a Northern lineage, forthwith 
shook off the dust of this ancient hall of learning and betook himself 
to the Lebanon Law School, at Lebanon, Tennessee, where he be- 
come a finished lawyer in the brief space of a single session. 

It will be seen from the foregoing that at each of the five col- 
leges he attended, to-wit: The Mississippi Baptist College, Clinton, 
Miss.; the University of Mississippi, Oxford, Miss.; Vanderbilt 
University, Nashville, Tenn. ; the University of Virginia, Charlottes- 
ville, Va., and the Lebanon Law School, Lebanon, Tenn., except the 
latter, Joe Bailey's conduct was such as to bring him into serious 
and disreputable conflict with the professors or the faculties of all 
these institutions. // u-ill also be observed that his scholarship ivas 
below par at the four colleges and universities enumerated. 

While some good men have attained to worth and eminence 
despite disreputable beginnings, it will certainly be conceded, in 
view of after developments, that Joseph Edward (alias Edgar, alias 
Weldon) Bailey's early displayed lawless habits were the natural 
forerunners of his present utter disregard of all law and the rights and 
feelings of his fellow men. 

Having completed the one session course at Lebanon, Mr. Bailey 
returned to Hazelhurst, the county seat of Copiah County, Miss., 
and forthwith became a candidate, not only for legal employment 
(he had no political influence to barter at that time), but a candidate 
for the Democratic nomination for the Mississippi Legislature. In 
this latter aspiration he was unsuccessful, and at the ensuing elec- 
tion, in the fall of 1883, he became the central figure in one of the 
most disgraceful and notorious chapters of crime and outlawery 
ever recorded in the South, and for which the Democratic party was 
sought to be made a scapegoat. 

A record of these crimes will be found in the next succeeding 
chapters. 



16 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 



ANTIDOTES FOR BAILEYISM. 



Not failure, but low aim is crime. — J. R. Lowell. 

A man loses ground every time he loses his temper. — The Author. 

In great attempts it is glorious even to fail. — Longinus. 

When round you raves the storm 

And winds run cold, then do not quail; 
But spread your breast, drink in the gale, 

And it will make you warm. 

And never be dismissed 

From getting your deserved desire. 

Meet chill with heat, but fire with fire. 
Resist, persist, insist! 

Dare all. Do what you can. 

Let Fate itself find you no slave. 

Make Death salute you at your grave. 
And say, "Here comes a man!" — Selected. 

Rage and raving belong to brutes; calmness and reason to men. 
— The Author. 

The tallest trees are most in the power of the winds, and ambi- 
tious men of the blasts of fortune. — Penn. 

Every man is his own ancestor, and every man is his own heir. 
He devises his own future, and he inherits his own past. — H. F. 
Hedge. 

Pride thrust Nebuchadnezzar out of men's society, Saul out of 
his kingdom, Adam out of paradise. Haman out of court, and Luci- 
fer out of heaven. — T. Adam. 

The principles now implanted in thy bosom will grow, and one 
day reach maturity; and in that maturity thou wilt find thy heaven 
or thy hell. — Thomas. 

Brilliancy of intellect is a blessing when directed by elevated and 
unselfish motives, a curse when prostituted to selfish ends. — The 
Author. 

Always vote for a principle, though you vote alone, and you may 
cherish the sweet reflection that your vote is never lost. — John Quincy 
Adams. 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 17 

The short sayings of wise and good men are of great value, like 
the dust of gold, or the sparks of diamonds. — Tilotson. 

If you would yield not to temptation, go not by temptation's door. 
— The Author. 

How little do they see what is, who frame their hasty judgments 
upon that which seems. — Southey. 

Applause waits on success. The fickle multitude, like the light 
straw that floats on the stream, glide with the current still, and follow 
fortune. — Franklin. 

He who establishes his argument by poise and command, shows 
that his reason is weak. — Montaigne. 

Keep thy reason at high tide; so shall thy foolish anger remain 
at low ebb. — The Author. 

When a man argues for victory and not for truth, he is sure of 
just one ally, that is the devil. — G. Macdonald. 

Heat and animosity, contest and conflict, may sharpen the wits, 
although they rarely do; they never strengthen the understanding, 
clear the perspicacity, guide the judgment, or improve the heart. — 
Landor. 

A social life that worships money or makes social distinction its 
aim, is, in spirit, an attempted aristocracy. — Anon. 

The Republicans expose, convict, expel some of their grafters; 
we Democrats of Texas — be it said to our shame — honor and glorify 
ours. — The Author. 

I never could believe that Providence had sent a few men into 
the world, ready booted and spurred to ride, and millions ready sad- 
dled and bridled to be ridden. — Richard Rumbold. 

The ordinary employment of artifice is the mark of a petty 
mind; and it almost always happens that he who uses it to cover 
himself in one place, uncovers himself in another. — Rochefoucauld. 

It is meet that noble minds keep ever with their likes; for who so 
firm that cannot be seduced. — Shakespeare. 

An honest man can make nothing in the public service. — J. W. 
Bailey in IQOI. 



18 Senator J. W. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

CHAPTER III. 
WHY BAILEY LEFT MISSISSIPPL 

At Greenville, Texas, October i (Dallas News, October 2), 1906, 
in explaining his friendship for Barnett Gibbs, a Mississippian, and 
giving that as a reason (?) why David R. Francis aided him in buy- 
ing the $100,000 Gibbs Ranch in Dallas County, which ranch was 
so purchased by Francis, it is believed, in consideration of Bailey's 
withdrawal of opposition to the St. Louis Exposition, of which 
Francis was president, Mr. Bailey said: "We had a riot and I was 
in it. * * * I did not steal any ballots and I would not let 
anybody else steal any ballots." 

In the Senate, December 18, 1905 (Congressional Record, page 
S^J :§Qj-), in a severe arraignment of Senator BurK)^,'^'tKe Standard Oil 
Senator from Texas said: "If a man in an unfortunate personal 
encounter should be compelled to take the life of his fellow man, 
that might or might not unfit him to be a Senator. It would depend 
entirely upon the provocation. It sometimes happens that high- 
minded men are compelled by a sense of self-defense to slay; but 
it never happens that a high-minded man attempts to line his pockets 
ivith dishonest gain." 

As to whether or not Mr. Bailey was a party to the theft of "any 
ballots," and as to what "provocation" or sense or "self-respect" 
impelled him to act as the "captain" and ring-leader of a mob of 
150 lawless characters before coming to Texas in the commission of 
brutish, cruel and premeditated crimes, including arson, murder 
and assassination, the following pages will be of especial interest. 

The facts in this chapter set out were first called to the atten- 
tion of the author during the suppression at Austin last winter by a 
patriotic blacksmith of North Texas. It required eight months, how- 
ever, for the author to procure a copy of the official record, one 
volume of which he finally found in private hands in Mississippi. 
This volume was sent to the author with the statement that it was 
the only one known to be extant in Mississippi, as "the balance had 
been burned by interested parties." The volume thus procured was 
accidentally left on the M., K. & T. ticket window in Dallas, Texas, 
August i6th, in the hurry of catching an outgoing train. Although 
the volume had a name and address in it, the author has never been 
able to locate it by advertising or otherwise, notwithstanding the 
employes about the depot assisted as best they could. Evidently 
some Bailey partisan picked up the book, and as its margins were 
marked, readily discovered its great importance, and thus another 
incident in the efifort at suppression was closed. 

Later Volume No. 4, Senate Report 512, 48th Congress, 1883- 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 19 

1884, was sent the Carnegie Library at San Antonio for the use of the 
author by the Librarian of the Congressional Library at Washing- 
ton, under a system of exchange used in such cases. This report, 
together with the testimony thereto appended, contains 767 pages 
and the following startling facts are gleaned from said report. 

U. S. SENATE ORDERS AN INVESTIGATION. 

On January 29, 1884, the Senate of the United States passed 
a resolution ordering an inquiry concerning certain election out- 
rages in Copiah County, Mississippi,, which occurred at and before 
the election (not a presidential year) of November 6, 1883. The 
matter was referred to the Senate Committee on Privileges and Elec- 
tions and that committee in turn appointed a sub-committee, consist- 
ing of Senators Hoar (chairman), Cameron and Frye, to represent 
the majority (Republicans), and Senators Saulsbury and Jonas to 
represent the minority (Democrats). The sub-committee met and, 
pursuant to resolutions adopted, proceeded to New Orleans, Louis- 
iana. In the latter city the committee convened in continuous ses- 
sion from February 15th to 27th, 1884, examining altogether 130 
witnesses from Copiah County, Mississippi, the seat of the outrages. 
The Democratic members of the committee were given every facility 
to secure an unlimited number of witnesses. They summoned a con- 
siderable number of the members of the mob hereinafter described, 
(including "Captain" Joe Bailey), but after consultation with them, 
declined to put them on the stand. (Authority: Senate Report, pp. I 
toX.) 

REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE. 

Senator Hoar on behalf of the Committee on Privileges and Elec- 
tions, submitted an exhaustive report (pages XH to XXVH), from 
which the following excerpts are taken: 

"The Committee entered upon its task with almost inexpressible 
repugnance. Important public duties demanded the constant pres- 
ence of all its members in the Senate. An investigation of the ques- 
tion whether communities of our countrymen have committed crimes 
like those supposed in the resolution, brings with it to all of us a 
deep sense of personal humiliation. The American people desire 
in this time of unexampled peace and prosperity to debate and settle 
other questions than those, merely to name which brings disgrace 
to the Republic itself." 

THE WORK OF THE COMMITTEE. 

"In obedience to the resolution of the senate, the Committee have 
investigated the occurrences alleged to have taken place in Copiah 
County. * * * The population is chiefly farmers and planters 
of cotton. The whites were shown by the testimony of many Demo- 
cratic witnesses to stand high in character and intelligence, as com- 
pared with the people of their race throughout the state. No ques- 



20 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

tion was made that the colored people were quiet, orderly, indus- 
trious and law-abiding. * * * The Republicans made no nomi- 
nations of their own for these offices, but all the opponents of the 
Democratic party announced under the name of Independents, and 
placed in nomination a ticket composed entirely of white men who 
were conceded by the Democratic witnesses before the Committee to 
be excellent men, unxceptionable in point of character and ability. 
* * * 

PROCEEDINGS OF THE ARMED COMPANY. 

"A company consisting of about 150 persons was organized 
under the command of Erastus Wheeler, who had the title of Major 
[Bailey, as will be shown by the succeeding testimony, was Captain 
of this mob of which Wheeler was Major]. These men were 
mounted, 90 of them armed with guns, the remainder with pistols 
buckled around them army style or hanging on the horns of their 
saddles. * * * A considerable number of white men, formerly 
Democrats, were enlisted in the Independent movement. About two 
weeks before the election, the armed company above named began 
riding about the country, taking with them a cannon. * * * 
They killed, wouqded, whipped and otherwise outraged a large 
number of persons. * * * 

MURDER OF TOM WALLIS. 

"Between one and two o'clock on Thursday night, ten days be- 
fore the election, Tom Wallis, a respectable colored man, was in 
bed in his house with his wife; their baby and a little son were with 
them at that end of the house. * * * And the mob broke into 
the house, took him from his bed and attempted to throw a rope 
over his neck. As he threw up his arms to prevent them, he was 
shot, five guns being fired, and instantly killed, falling upon the 
skirt of his wife's dress. One ball went through the neck of the hus- 
band and the arm of the wife, [who afterwards died from the 
wound]. There were about twenty persons armed and mounted who 
came to the house. The road for thirty yards from the gate was 
full of armed horsemen. 

"On the Friday night before the election they came to Isham 
Gillmore's house and began firing ofif their guns about it; some of the 
shot struck the house. * * * There were twenty or thirty of 
them. Wheeler, who was in command, took a light and said: 
'Hello, Isham, come out and sit down and let's talk about politics.' 
T would not go out,' said Isham. 'The reason I would not go out 
I thought of old man Wallis and thought if I got out there while I 
was talking with him some of them might come and throw a rope 
over mv head, and so I told them, no, I don't want to talk about poli- 
tics; I had no politics to talk about.' He says: 'Well, by God, what 
is you gwine to vote? By God, if you are going to vote the radical 
ticket, you need not come on the ground, but if you are going to vote 



The Political Lifc-Stury of a Fallen Idol 21 

the Democratic ticket you can come; by God we are going to kill 
out the whole God damned set and generation of radicalism.' When 
they went out the gate that night, 1 went out the back door, and I 
never went back but stayed out and only went back in the day and 
laid around in the fields. [Bailey, as will hereinafter appear, in re- 
ferring to 'me and my friend Wheeler,' said: '1 went down in beat 
3, me and my friend Wheeler. I had thought to stump the beat, but 
after I got down there in a portion of that country we came to the 
conclusion that I could do more in the saddle than I could on the 
stump. Therefore, we went around to electioneer, and I tell you 
when we started out we took along with us something like this (pull- 
ing out a long pistol). I tell you, my friends, it is the best method 
of electioneering I have ever seen. We would come to a house and 
my friend Wheeler would get right down and go right in and take 
a seat by the fire with those persons. And would electioneer a few 
minutes and they most invariably agreed to vote the ticket 1"] 

THE WHIPPING OF HANDY FORTNER. 

"On the night that Wallis was killed, a little before ten o'clock 
the same crowd went to the house of an old man named Handy Fort- 
ner. About twenty of them took Fortner from his house three or 
four hundred yards to a place in the woods. * * * They 
inflicted a most brutal and cruel whipping and he was terribly lacer- 
ated. While they were beating him they asked him 'How he was 
going to vote.' * * * He told them in his terror and agony that 
'he was going to vote the Democratic ticket.' They told him 'If he 
voted the Republican [Independent] ticket that they would blow 
his brains out.' * * * Some of the guns in the hands of these 
rufifians were new. 

SHOOTING OF FRANK HAYS. 

"The Saturday night before the election about fifty of the same 
party broke into the house of Frank Hays, a colored Republican, 
where he and his wife were in bed asleep. They shot him in the 
leg, which was broken by the shot. His wife was also shot in the 
throat and through the shoulder. Hays was badly disabled and 
unfit for any work when he appeared before the Committee on the 
23rd of February. 

BURNING OF DANIEL CRUMP'S HOUSE. 

"About a week before the election a party of Democrats set fire 
to the house of Daniel Crump. This was about ten o'clock at night. 
Crump and his sons tried to extinguish the flames, but were shot at 
by the crowd and prevented. The house was totally destroyed. 
About twenty persons were said to have been there, of whom Crump 
recognized two. Little and Norman. His house and clothing were 
all burned up. This was a clear, plain case of arson, which, by the 
law of Mississippi, is capital and not bailable. * * * They 



22 Senator J. W. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

were arrested but allowed bail. A few nights after twenty-five men 
came to his place and threatened to kill Crump if he did not with- 
draw his complaint, which he did. They told him Mathews was 
dead, they thought Oliver was dead, and Mose Smith about dead. 
They reckoned to kill him that night and then the main people would 
be dead. * * * 

TAKING INDEPENDENT TICKETS. 

[Bailey may 'never have stolen any ballots or let anybody else 
steal any ballots,' as he said at Greenville, October i, 1906, but the 
following is very significant.] 

"Orange Catchings was an old man living in beat 5. The Repub- 
lican [Independent] tickets were sent out to him on the Saturday 
before the election. He had given them to a neigbor named William 
Campbell to distribute on election day. On Monday night he heard 
the Democratic mob shouting in his vicinity and saw them ride by 
'like men on dress parade.' They were armed with guns. About 
four o'clock Tuesday morning they came to his house, cursed him 
and threatened to shoot him, telling him if he didn't produce the 
tickets they would kill him. 

"He [Jack Thompson, who was warned to leave the country] 
saw a large number of them ride by on Sunday evening, armed, about 
100 in number, some with veils over their faces. The cannon and 
guns were firing. He mounted his horse and left the country." 

SWORN NOT TO VOTE. 

"At one o'clock Monday night before the election the 'proces- 
sion' visited the house of Benjamin Sanderford, a colored Republi- 
can in Beat 5. His yard was full of horses and men. They dragged 
him undressed from his bed into the yard, seriously injuring him 
by striking against the door post, and compelled him to swear that 
he would not come to the polls. They returned two hours later 

and cried, 'Bring in your rope and let's hang the .' 

The negro had left his house and lay concealed in his garden and so 
escaped. 

VISITATION OF SOLOMAN SMITH. 

"Soloman Smith lived in Beat 2. They came to his house Mon- 
day night just at dawn of day. He had heard them riding around 
firing all night. They rode around his house, broke down the door, 
went in and asked him for the tickets. * * * They said, 'God 
damn you, give up the tickets or we will shoot you.' He gave up 
the tickets. One of the ruffians knocked him down and beat him 
over the head with a large horse pistol. They took the tickets away. 
He thinks they 'made a clean sweep,' of the horses in his neighbor- 
hood. ' Their horses seemed 'clean rode to death.' He was too badly 
injured to go to vote the next day. 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 23 

THE "PROCESSION" AT WALLACE GILLMORE'S. 

"About two or three o'clock on the night before the election the 
'procession' visited the house of Wallace Gillmore, an old colored 
man. They broke in his door as he lay in bed with his wife. He 
counted nine who came into the house and fifteen more at the door, 
besides a large crowd out at the fence. They were armed with 
double barrel guns and pistols. They dragged him out of the house, 
compelled him to get on his knees, presented pistols to his face, 
demanded how he was going to vote and told him if he was going 
to vote the Independent ticket he had better 'Dig his hole and make 
his box before he went.' They also told him Print Mathews would 
be killed the next day. [Print Mathews was a highly respectable 
white man whose assassination the following day by Erastus Wheeler, 
having been selected for that purpose by 'vote' or 'lot', marked the 
climax of this lawlessness.] 

THOMAS SINCLAIR'S EXPERIENCE. 

"Thomas Sinclair, a colored man living in Beat 3, was the Demo- 
cratic candidate for Secretary of State in 1869. He owns about a 
thousand acres of land, steam mill and good stock of all kinds — 
especially cows, horses, oxen, wagons, mules and hogs. He had 
joined the Independent party but left the county for fear of injury. 
He saw these bands riding by his door. 

STORE SHOT INTO. 

"John Smith has lived in Beat 3, fifty years; owns land, houses 
and cattle. He slept on the counter in his store. Saturday or Sunday 
night they shot into his store. The bullet ranged along where he 
was in the habit of sleeping. He got news that they were going to 
kill him and took to the woods, where he remained a little more than 
a week. 

OTHER INSTANCES. 

"Alex Gohagen, colored, owned property in Beat 3, for which 
he paid about $10,000. Five men came to his door Sunday night 
before the election. They told him they had 144 men altogether. 
There was a cannon at the gate. He afterward heard the firing and 
judged the number stated was correct. * * * They then asked 
if he had heard of the killing of Tom Wallace. * * * 

"Very early on the same Sunday night six men entered the house 
of Jeff Shields, who lived in Beat 3. They were about 100 outside 
armed with guns and pistols. They told him they were around elec- 
tioneering and demanded who he was going to vote for. * * * 
One of them said, 'Throw that rope in here; we will hang him.' 
They began to prepare the rope and he finally promised that he 
would stay at home and not vote. Erastus Wheeler, the murderer, 
[Bailey's 'noble friend' and superior officer] came onto the door 
1—4 



24 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

Step and said 'Old man, by God, I want to know how you are going 
to vote. * * * If you leave here Tuesday to go to Tailholt 
intentionally to vote the Independent ticket, you will have somebody 
digging your grave, for I will put you into the earth as certain as 
hell.' * * * Shortly before the election a meeting was appointed 
for the organization of a colored Republican club. A party of white 
Democrats, including Hargraves, brother of the Democratic sheriff; 
Hart, who shot Burnett [because he was said to have 'made sport of 
Bailey'] ; Bailey and Morrison, two Democratic lawyers, and others, 
rode over, broke up the meeting and compelled Oliver, who was 
to speak, to ride before them back to Hazelhurst. The church was 
burned the following night. 

THE BAND AT AINSWORTH'S STORE. 

"J. W. Bondurant is an active Republican and white man, dwell- 
ing in Beat 3. On Friday night before the election he saw this armed 
and mounted band, about 150 in number, at Ainsworth's store. * 
* * The mob shot off their pistols and cannon and halloed and 
whooped and yelled around. * * * The Democratic band 
came around the store shouting, 'Somebody had better get away from 
here.' They turned their cannon towards the store and shot it. One 
of them cried, 'Put a log chain in it and shoot the d— d thing.' 
Wheeler was in command. ['Captain' Joe Bailey, according to one 
of the witnesses, was called on for a 'speech.'] They rode away and 
rode back and fired their guns into the store. First two pistols or 
guns and then a continual firing. Two balls passed between Erastus 
Mathews and Bondurant, who were about a foot apart. There were 
also cries 'Bring them out and swing them up to a limb.' This was 
between nine and ten o'clock Friday night before the election [on 
Tuesday]. 

"It is impossible to relate the full details of the greater part of 
the outrages. * * * The meeting of the Independent Executive 
Committee, held at Hazelhurst the day before election, was broken 
up by the approach of the armed mob. Enochs, the Independent 
candidate for chancery clerk, was advised by a Democratic friend to 
leave town the day before election, which he did. 

"Joseph P. Jones, the president of the board of supervisors, who 
had lived in the county from infancy, was warned that three men 
had been elected to kill him on the first opportunity. On Tuesday 
evening about two weeks before the election he rode up to a place 
by the roadside where about forty Democrats were in consultation. 
A proposition was made to take him off his horse and hang him, but 
the majority fortunately were against it. [How do you suppose 
'Captain' Joe voted?] 

"At a political meeting held sometime before the election near 
Erastus Matthews' store, Charles Allen, * * * moved that they 
'go into Matthews' store and buy a rope and take Bufkin out and 
hang him.' Bufkin was an influential Independent; served in the 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 25 

Confederate Army; had been the Treasurer of the county and was 
then supervisor in Beat 2. * * * There was a reign of terror 
all throughout the county. * * * Bufkin, a Democrat, testified 
that he asked Higdon, one of the leaders [Higdon was one of those, 
for whom with Bailey, warrants of arrest had been issued], if they 
were going to kill anybody and he said 'yes.' 

THE MURDER OF J. P. MATTHEWS. 

"But the most conspicuous crime is yet to be reported. J. P. 
Matthews was a merchant about forty-five or six years of age, of 
great capacity and energy and of large property. He and his wife 
belonged to old and respectable Mississippi families. He was a 
native of Copiah County, as was his father before him. He had been 
a Union man through the war. He had two sons in college and two 
daughters aged about nineteen and sixteen years. The wife and 
children all testified before the Committee. It would be difficult 
to find anyAvhere a family whose impression as they appeared before 
the Committee could be more attractive. There is no member of 
the Senate who might not be proud to introduce anywhere as his 
own the four children who came to tell us the story of the murder 
of their father. 

MATTHEWS' CHARACTER. 

"Mr. Matthews was one of the wealthiest and most successful 
business men in Copiah County. His dealings w^ere largely with 
Democrats. He had been sheriff of the county six years by appoint- 
ment from the Governor and once or twice by popular election. He 
was alderman of the city of Hazelhurst year before last. He was 
extremely public spirited, taking a great interest in schools and a 
liberal benefactor to churches. Persons in trouble and distress were 
wont to resort to him for sympathy and aid. The man who killed 
him was his debtor, and had been hospitably entertained beneath 
his roof a fortnight before the murder. There never was a charge 
against him of dishonorable conduct, or of an offense against the 
law. He was extremely hospitable, entertaining much company. 
He had more influence with both whites and blacks than any other 
man in the county. Many Democrats would vote for him who would 
vote for no other Republican. Wheeler, who killed him, had soli- 
cited his support for the office of mayor, for which he proposed to 
be a candidate, and had said, T had rather vote for him than for 
any man that is running for office from the simple fact that I never 
went to him in my life to get an accommodation that I didn't get 
it.' His wife said, 'He always helped anybody who was in distress, 
no matter who it was. They never came to him and went off with- 
out anything.' Mr. Millsaps, a Democratic cler^ymtin ii-ho had 
known Mattheus since he was a hoy and to whom he went to school, 
testified, 'He was a very pleasant, peacable, quiet, good man, very 
charitable, generous and social in his disposition. I can say gener- 
ally that he was as good a man as was in Hazelhurst, leaving out all 
idea of religion.' 



26 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

"Mitchell, editor of the Copiah Signal, the Democratic paper, 
testified: 'J. P. Matthews, personally, was a very clever, social man, 
but the people there regarded him as an agitator.' 

"judge Bridewell, an intelligent and able lawyer, who had been 
an officer on General Hardee's staff, testified: 'I can express his 
character in three words: He was a man who had the courage of 
his convictions. He was perfectly honest. I never heard of his 
integrity being called into question. He was a very generous man. 
He possessed beyond contradiction the qualities which are described 
by the word "manly".' 

"Williamson, the mayor of Hazelhurst, a Democrat, testified: 
'He was a man who was regarded as a very clever man, personally 
and socially. He was generous; a man who had a good many friends 
belonging to the different parties in the county. Outside of his poli- 
tics Mr. Matthews was very well liked. Of course they didn't like 
his politics.' 

"He was of small stature; he weighed only one hundred and 
thirty pounds and was quite lame. 

DETERMINATION TO MURDER MATTHEWS. 

"The Democratic minority of Copiah County regarded Mr. 
Matthews as the leader of their opponents and the great obstacle to 
their taking possession of the offices in spite of the will of the major- 
ity. They determined to kill him unless he would abandon politics, 
and so strike terror into his supporters. 

"As the election progressed this purpose became well known. A 
conversation between two active Democrats, to the effect that the 
leaders of the Republicans must be killed, has already been related. 
The night before the election, Woods, the Democratic candidate for 
coroner and ranger, said that Matthews would be killed. Hartley, 
one of the Democratic procession, said, after the death of Matthews, 
that he knew he was to be killed on that day for a week beforehand. 
At the polls at Tailholt, early on the morning of the election, in a 
crowd of Democrats, who were swearing and firing their pistols, one 
was heard to say: 

"Oh, yes, by G — d, we will get some of them today. We would 
have got Print Matthews yesterday, G — d d— n him, if he hadn't 
crawled into his hole." 

"The armed crowd who broke into Wallace Gilmore's house in 
Beat 3 told him they were going to kill Print Matthews tomorrow. 
William P. Ware, a highly respectable Democratic merchant, testi- 
fied that he heard before the election that the crowd had passed a 
resolution to kill Matthews, and that the sheriff had been notified 
and said that it was out of his power to stop it. Ware warned 
Matthews, who told him the sheriff had promised him protection 
if he would stay in town. William Myers, the Democratic secretary 
of state, met young Matthews the day of the murder, as he was taking 
the train at Oxford. He asked Matthews what he was going home 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 27 

for; and being told, said — 'he knew it would be done, though he 
hadn't heard of it; he knew it would be done that day.' 

THE ARMED BAND AT HAZELHURST. 

"The armed band we have described came into Hazelhurst with 
their guns and cannon on Monday, the day before election. The 
statement that they had passed a resolution to kill Matthews before 
they entered the town rests upon hearsay only. But as they 
approached the town one of them was heard to say, as he rode along 
the line, Tf I can get ten men to go with me we will wind matters 
up.' The reply was, 'You can get as many backers as you want.' 
After they disbanded in the evening they were heard cursing one 
another for cowardice, and saying, 'We knew you would not do it 
after you promised.' Both these declarations probably related to 
the purpose to kill Matthews that day. When they were within a 
short distance of the town a colored man came to Matthews, who 
was in his house, and told him he had just overheard a plot between 
Meade, the chairman of the Democratic Committee, and several 
others, to deputize Matthews to quell the mob, and to have it 
arranged that he should be killed on his way to meet them. A few 
minutes after this notice, Sherifif Hargraves and Meade arrived at 
the house. Hargraves said: 'He had tried to get somebodv to go 
out and make the arrests, and that he would deputize him to go out 
and arrest the mob; he was an old sherifif and a suitable person.' 

MATTHEWS WARNED NOT TO VOTE. 

"Matthews had received three letters, one signed '150,' threat- 
ening his life. He told Hargraves, pointing to Meade, that not half 
an hour before he had been informed that Meade and others had 
made a plot to assassinate him. If they were going to murder him 
they might just as well come there and murder him as to get him 
off there and assassinate him. Matthews had a daughter sick in his 
house. He had previously demanded protection from the sherifif and 
the city marshall. The city marshall had reported this request to 
Meade, who had said he believed there was no danger, and had 
called at Matthews' store to assure him he would aid in protecting 
his family. Matthew's brother said they would protect themselves. 
Meade told him he would 'play hell at that.' As the crowd came 
into town Meade went out and met them and guided them away from 
Matthews' house, telling them of the pledge he had made in their 
behalf. They went to the courthouse and were addressed, as they 
sat on their horses, by Mr. Barksdale, the Democratic member of 
Congress for that district. There is a conflict of evidence as to his 
speech, and we content ourselves with referring to his own testimony, 
which will be found exceedingly instructive. After the speech they 
passed directly by Matthews' house, saying as they passed, 'Some- 
body had better get away from here.' After passing the house they 
halted and passed the following resolution, which was handed by 
Meade to one McLemore and by him brought to Matthews' house : 



28 Senator J. IT. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

"JVhereas, it is thought the public interest will be subserved by 
Print Matthews absenting himself from the polls on election: Ihere- 

'' 'Be it resolved, that Print Matthews be ordered to keep within 
his own inclosure tomorrow. 

" 'Adopted by the citizens of Copiah County, this the sth day of 
November, 1883.' 

"Matthews replied: . 

" 'This is a very strange proceeding in a Republican government. 
1 think I have as much right to vote as any one of you. I have tried 
to be useful to society in every way that 1 could. Now, John, ypu 
have got it in your power to murder me, I admit. But I am going 
to vote tomorroiv, unless you do kill me.' 

"This message was delivered to Matthews in his own house, in 
the presence of his wife and daughter. 

MATTHEWS MURDERED. 

"The hour of his doom approached. After breakfast, not far 
from nine in the morning, the election oflicers opened the polls just 
across the street from his house. By the custom of Mississippi no 
persons are permitted to remain in the room where the election is 
held but three inspectors, the clerk and the challenger representing 
each party. Into their presence the voters are admitted, who deposit 
their ballots and depart. A double-barreled shotgun had been 
secretly conveyed beforehand into the room and concealed in a wood- 
box. There were some Democrats with shotguns, friends of 
Wheeler, at the door. Wheeler had been constituted the Democratic 
challenger. Matthews was selected by the Republicans [Indepen- 
dents] present, when the polls opened, to act as their representative. 
He said he had to go home, that his daughter was sick, but that he 
would vote before he went. Wheeler himself afterwards said that 
he said to Matthews, 'Print, I would not vote today if I were you.' 
Matthews went to the table and handed his vote open, to the election 
oflicer. The ofTicer handed it back to him and asked him to fold it. 
He took the ballot in both hands, when Wheeler, who stood at a 
distance of 18 feet, shot him with both barrels in the breast. Twenty- 
four buckshot lodged in him, one charge just below the throat and 
the other between the breasts. He fell instantly dead to the floor, 
an American citizen, on his native soil, within earshot of his home, 
in the act of casting his ballot. A man braver or kinder never con- 
secrated battle-field with his blood. 

"Wheeler's son-in-law and other young men with arms instantly 
pressed into the polling room, by the back door, through which the 
voters were to go out. The front door was at once locked. 

"Matthews' daughter, Mary, a girl of nineteen, heard the sound 
of the gun as she sat on her father's porch. She says in her testi- 
mony: 'I did not know he had gone until I went through the house 
to look for him, and I went back and asked ma if he had gone; she 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 29 

said she reckoned so. I looked all through the house, and could not 
see him anywhere, and then 1 went out on the front porch and sat 
down, and directly I heard a gun fire, and I knew what it was as 
soon as I heard it. I told ma I heard the gun, and I knew what they 
had done; and I went uptown where he was, and they had the front 
door locked. Mr. Coggswell, one of the inspectors, was on the out- 
side, with the door locked. He told me 1 could not come in there, 
and I told him I was coming in anyway. He said that I had no busi- 
ness in there and could not come in: I told him I knew pa was in 
there, and that they had murdered him, and that I was going in. 
Mr. Groome came and caught hold of me, and carried me half way 
to the store, and I turned around and went back, and Mr. Coggswell 
told me I had better go back home and stay there. I told him that 
I didn't care what he thought, that I was going in there! that it was 
none of his business. The door was still locked, and my Uncle Leon 
came in a few minutes and they broke the door open then, and we 
went in and found my father dead. 

RESOLUTIONS OF THE MASS MEETING. 

"[On the next day a meeting was held in the courthouse at Hazel- 
hurst, at which a resolution, in part as follows, was adopted, "Cap- 
tain" Joe Bailey being the orator of the day, speaking in favor of its 
adoption] : ''Whereas, certain rumors are current that the relatives 
of the late J. P. Matthews have threatened the peace of society, [the 
only breach of peace of society in evidence was that Mr. Matthews 
had been instrumental in the issuance of warrants for the arrest of 
"Captain" Joe Bailey and the other ring-leaders of his "society of 
bulldozers,"] in order to avenge his death by killing Democrats and 
destroying their property: Now, therefore, 

" Be it resolved by the people of Copiah County in mass-meet- 
ing assembled this day, at the courthouse of said county, that if any 
person shall be injured, or an attempt made to injure him, either in 
person or in property, in any manner by the said relatives or friends 
of J. P. Matthews, that we hereby declare that we will hold his said 
relatives and friends who participate accountable for the same, and 
that we will regard them as without the pale and protection of the 
law and common enemies of society , and that we will visit upon them 
certain, swift retribution. 

" 'Be it further resolved that so long as the friends and relatives 
of the said J. P. Matthews obey the law and become good citizens 
["Captain" Joe Bailey citizens, alias, later. Standard Oil citizens] 
we hereby pledge them the protection of the law. * * *' 

"These resolutions were served on the family of Mr. Matthews 
as they returned from the funeral. They need no comment. 

"At this meeting, Bailey, the lawyer, and captain of the company 
of which Wheeler was the major, made a speech [This speech wai 
testified to, as will hereinafter appear, by an ex-Confederate soldier] : 

" 'My friends, you have won a great victory. Democrats we 



30 Senator J. W. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

were and Democrats we are. We have got a Democratic stock of 
officers. By the next election we hope to have a Democratic Con- 
gress. [Do you suppose "Captain" Joe was thinking about standing 
for Congress at this early date?] 

"Some one called out, 'Tell us about Beat 3.' He went on: 

" 'Now, I will tell you something about Beat 3. I went down in 
Beat 3, 7ne and my friend JVheeler; I had thought to stump the beat 
but after I got down there in a portion of that country, we came to the 
conclusion that I could do more good in the saddle than I could on the 
stump. Therefore, we went round to electioneer, and I tell you that 
when we started out we took along with us something like this (pull- 
ing out a pistol) , I tell you, my friends, it is the best method of elec- 
tioneering I have ever seen. My friend Wheeler would get right 
down and go right in and take a seat right by the fire with those per- 
sons. He would electioneer a few minutes, and they most invariably 
agreed to vote the ticket before we left. Oh, we didn't hurt any- 
body. [Then all the other witnesses lied, and "Captain" Joe's word 
is below par in Texas now. He has deceived the people too long and 
too often for them to retain that confidence that was once so freely 
and so fully his. Of course "Captain" Joe said that they didn't hurt 
anybody" because he himself was likely to be arraigned for the felon- 
ies charged in the affidavits upon which a warrant had been issued 
for his arrest.] 

" 'It would be well for some persons to go round and see those 
people who affiliate with the opposite party and are voting different 
with us, and encourage them to come together and vote with us. // 
they agree to come back and vote with us, grant them all courtesy, 
and be peaceable with them, but in the event that that should fail, 
then what shall we do?'" [Loud cries, "kill them out, kill them 
out!" cheering, and after the cheering subsided, a loud voice, "kill 
them out!"] " 'No; I would not advise you to kill them out; but I 
believe you will do it without advice.' " 

[Comment: Is it any wonder that the Standard Oil bully from 
Texas should have many times since this Mississippi training have 
exhibited a cruel, vindictive, brutish and lawless spirit, such, for 
example, as when he said to the Suppression Committee of 1907 that 
he deserved great credit for not having murdered his enemies out- 
right, and that he "would do so yet if he could get them all in a 
bunch."] 

SHOOTING OF A. W. BURNETT. 

"On the 6th of September, just two months before the election, 
Burnett, the chairman of the Independent Executive Committee, 
learned that an ignorant Democratic negro had been recommended 
to the Governor as Republican inspector by the Democratic com- 
mittee. He waited on Governor Lowry and remonstrated against 
the transaction. He was waylaid on his return and shot by Charles 
Hart, an active Democrat, afterwards conspicuous in the armed mob. 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 31 

Burnett was active in politics. An attempt was made to impeach 
his character. But it was abundantly shown, even from the most 
hostile sources, that his character stood high, except as affected by 
political prejudice. He was the only lawyer at Hazelhurst who was 
not a Democrat and had a large and growing practice. He had made 
some political speeches and on one occasion met Governor Lowry 
in debate and divided with him the time. Hart was in company with 
eight Democrats, among them Bailey, who made the principal speech 
at the meeting of November 7th, and who acted under Wheeler as 
captain of the Democratic company. As Burnett passed them, near 
the corner of the hotel, in the street. Hart said, 'I understand you say 
you didn't make sport of Bailey the other night.' Burnett replied 
that he had not and could prove that he had not mentioned Bailey's 
name. Hart replied, 'You are a God damned liar,' and began to 
draw his pistol. The weapon caught in his pocket, when Burnett 
drew a knife and struck at Hart, cutting his clothes in the shoulder, 
but not wounding him. Burnett then ran and had got about twenty 
feet and was entering the hotel when Hart shot him through the 
groin. The men who were with Hart separated in different directions, 
as if to surround and head him off in which ever direction he might 
attempt to escape. He lay several weeks in great danger of his life, 
but recovered. 

"Subpoenas in blank were put at the service of the minority of 
the committee and by them entrusted to Messrs. Dodds and Sexton, 
who were employed by a meeting of prominent gentlemen in Copiah 
County to present their case before the Committee. They summoned 
a considerable number of persons who were among the mob under 
Wheeler, but dismissed them all without examination. [Bailey 
among them.] 

ATTEMPTS TO PALLIATE THE OUTRAGES. 

"There has been some attempt to find a feeble palliation for the 
murder of Matthews by representing that he was a violent man, a 
desperado, and that his death was not due to political causes. This 
at least, is to be said to the credit of the murderer, that he himself 
disdained this contemptible pretext. Wheeler declared that 

" Tt fell to his lot to kill him. * * * that he had nothing 
against Matthews, but that he had pledged himself to Beat 3 to kill 
him, and that he had done it and was not ashamed of it.' 

"On the 13th or 14th of February, 1884, Wheeler said in a street 
car in Jackson 

" 'I killed Print Matthews. I told him not to vote and he voted, 
and I killed him. It was not me that killed him; it was the party. 
If I had not been a Democrat I would not have killed him. It was 
not me, but the Democratic party; and now if the party is a mind 
to throw me off, damn such a party.' 

"A young man, who inquired if Wheeler had any hard feeling 
against Matthews, being answered 'no,' then said he thought it a cold 



32 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

blooded murder, and had three pistols presented at his head [Won- 
der if "Captain" Joe was among these suppressors?] and was com- 
pelled to retract his statement. 

CHARGES AGAINST MATTHEWS. 

"There are few earnest and influential political leaders against 
whom charges are not made by their opponents quite as serious as any 
that were urged against Print Matthews. It was not denied that he 
was an able and successful business man, of blameless private life, 
never charged with an offense against the law, public spirited, kind- 
hearted, generous, brave. He and his wife apart from politics, would 
have been welcome in the best society anywhere. No evidence was 
produced in support of this charge, [negro domination] and its pre- 
posterous character was frankly conceded by some of the Democratic 
witnesses. There was a rumor that he had made a violent or incen- 
diary speech. No man was found who had heard such a speech or 
who could report any improper sentiment which he had ever uttered 
in public. A report of one of his speeches was laid before us vvhich 
will compare favorably in moderation of tone with the political 
speeches of many men who stand high in public esteem in both par- 
ties. It was charged that he sought to make a race issue, to organize 
the negroes against the whites. But no evidence whatever appears 
to support this charge. We do not remember any evidence that he 
ever addressed the colored people as such. He appealed, as was his 
right, to the people of Copiah to support the party to which he be- 
longed, by arguments addressed to their common interests without 
regard to race. 

"Matthews was slain solely because he was an eminent and in- 
fluential Republican. That his death might strike terror into the 
hearts of the opponents of the Democratic party and enable them, the 
party being in the minority of legal votes, to take possession of Copiah 
County. He was not murdered for any intemperance of speech; he 
was not murdered for any personal quality of character; he was not 
murdered because he advised the negroes to vote. * * * No 
National election was pending. * * * They say in defense of 
these practices that they are necessary to preserve their civilization. 
We did not see the necessity. The sooner the civilization perishes 
which is founded on cheating and murder the better. Better that the 
waters of the great river should again cover the land which in ages 
it has formed, than that it should be occupied by a State which 
breeds her youth to fraud and assassination. 

VIEWS OF THE MINORITY. 

The views of the minority of the Investigating Committee, to-wit, 
the Democratic members thereof, diflfer from those of the majority 
heretofore set out, in the main only as to the political aspects of the 
situation. The author believes, after a very careful reading of every 
word that was uttered before the Committee by 130 witnesses, that 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 33 

J. P. Matthews (Print Matthews) was murdered by Wheeler as 
per an agreement by "vote or lot" cast by the ring leaders of the mob, 
including "Captain" Joe Bailey, not because he was a Republican, 
but that his assassination was precipitated by the fact of his bein^ an 
influential and substantial citizen, and consequently to be reckoned 
with in the probable resulting prosecution of the ring-leaders for the 
crimes they had committed in the country. A careful perusal of the 
testimony hereinafter set out will itself support this conclusion. 

But referring to the views the Democratic minority of the Com- 
mittee, it will be seen from the following excerpts from their report 
(Senate Report, pages XLIII to LXIX) that they did not undertake 
to shield this mob or its members in any sense, but rather take the 
position that the lawlessness and outrages should not be charged up 
to the better elements of the Democratic party in Copiah County, 
but to the lawless characters composing the mob, of which "Captain" 
Joe seemed to be the brains. 

Here are some excerpts from the report of the minority: 

"There was an election to be held in Copiah County for the mem- 
bers of the Legislature and certain local offices. No member of 
Congress was to be voted for nor was a Senator to be elected by the 
Legislature. The election was purely local and could have in its 
results no possible bearing upon questions with which any depart- 
ment of general government had the least concern. * * * There 
was no Republican ticket nominated but the party opposed to the 
Democracy assumed the name of Independents, and its candidates, 
with one or two exceptions, were persons who had never claimed to 
be Republicans. * * * From whatever cause or causes any of 
the alleged acts of violence may have occurred or by whom com- 
mitted, they meet the unqualified disapproval of the undersigned, as 
we are sure they do of all good citizens of Copiah County. [How 
do you suppose this will sound to "Captain" Joe from Democratic 
Senators after a lapse of 23 years?] 

"The undersigned have no word of excuse or palliation for the 
crime of Erastus Wheeler, nor any sympathy with the criminal act 
with which he is charged. On the contrary, so far as they are 
informed of the character of the ofTense, they hold both him and his 
act in utter abhorrence and detestation. [What harsh language this 
to have been uttered by Democratic U. S. Senators concerning "Cap- 
tain" Joe's "noble friend!" Almost as harsh words these as some 
that have since been uttered concerning his other indicted friend, 
"My dear Pierce."] 

"Erastus Wheeler and J. P. Matthews were both citizens of 
Hazelhurst, and, according to Wheeler's statement to Doctor Pitts, 
were on friendly terms. On the Saturday night preceding the elec- 
tion, affidavits were made by one of the brothers of Matthews and 
another man at the instance, as was reported and believed, of J. P. 
Matthews, who was present, for the arrest of certain persons, includ- 
ing Wheeler [and "Captain" Joe] and warrants of arrest were issued 



34 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

thereon. Wheeler and Matthews met on the morning of the election 
in the room where the election was to be held and had some con- 
versation in an undertone, not heard by the officers of election present 
in the room. No other persons were in the room [except the officers of 
election], the doors of which were closed. Matthews and Wheeler 
separated and the former had just deposited his ballot when Wheeler, • 
who was some distance from him, fired a gun which had not been seen 
by the officers of election, and Matthews fell mortally wounded. * 
*" * 

"i/zj [Matthews] character, whether good or bad, would neither 
increase nor diminish the hcinousness of the offense if he was mur- 
dered. * * * There was, so far as the undersigned are informed, 
no justification or excuse for the killing of Mr. Matthews by 
JV heeler. 

[Admitting then for argument's sake, from the standpoint of 
an extreme Southern view, that "Captain" Bailey or his bulldozers 
were justified (which the author does not admit, though he be 
intensely Southern) in the murder and other crimes committed in the 
country, it is seen from the foregoing that the Democratic members 
of the Investigating Committee saw absolutely "no justification or 
excuse for the killing of Mr. Matthews."] 

THE RESOLUTIONS OF THE MEETING AT HAZELHURST. 

"On the day after the killing of Matthews rumors were rife in the 
town of Hazelhurst [set afloat perhaps by "Captain" Joe and his 
"noble friend"] that the friends and relatives of the deceased were 
about to put into execution his oft repeated threats [?] that his death 
would be avenged. * * * a meeting was held and passed reso- 
lutions, which met, as they deserved, the unqualified condemnation 
of the people of Copiah County. No one of unprejudiced mind who 
listened to the witnesses on this point can, for a moment, believe that 
these resolutions expressed the general sentiments of the people there 
[and yet "Captain" Joe made a vehement speech in support of those 
resolutions, and his JDemocracy, his discretion, or his standing ought 
not to have been called in question even by Democratic United States 
Senators]. Reprehensible and indefensable as these resolutions are, 
they do not justify the inferences which the majority of the committee 
seek to draw from them, nor the accusation against the people of an 
entire county. * * *" 

[Thus it is seen that the Democratic minority of the committee 
sought only to protect the good name of the conservative and law- 
abiding Democrats of Copiah County, which had been brought in 
question and subjected to reproach by "Captain" Joe and his "society 
of Bulldozers."] 




HON. JXO. M. DUNCAN, 
Now UF Houston, Texas. 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 35 



MISSISSIPPI PRESS COMMENT. 

WHY MATTHEWS WAS KILLED. 

Every bullet that was shot into Matthews will be worth thou- 
sands of votes to the Republicans, because it will be said, and can- 
not be denied, he was killed on account of his politics by intolerant 
Democrats. — Vicksburg Post {Independent Democrat). 

Of course our people do not want and will not submit to a rule 
of ignorance and corruption, but this can be averted without com- 
mitting such a terrible murder as was that of Matthews, and with- 
out passing such foolish and intolerant resolutions as those of the 
Hazelhurst mass-meeting. — Vicksburg Post (Independent Demo- 
crat.) 

AN INDEPENDENT VIEW. 

We have repeatedly defied those who are disposed to condemn 
the Post for its utterances in regard to the Matthews killing to name 
a single word or sentence of ours that would or could be used by the 
Republicans of the North. We renew the defiance. * * * 7/,^ 
killing of Mattfieavs has been shown beyond the possibility of doubt 
by the most skeptical to be a cold-blooded, predetermined, heinous 
assassination, instigated by the [lawless] Democrats of Copiah 
County, and, since the perpetration of the cowardly, inhuman act, 
condoned and defended by them to an extent next in shame and dis- 
grace to the shocking deed itself. Matthews, unwarned of his life, 
was shot down like a dog because lie had exercised the fundamental 
right of free government of casting a free ballot; shot by the calmly- 
appointed tool of an intolerant and blood-thirsty mob. * * * 
Then, such things being true, who, knowing any distinction whatever 
between honor and dishonor, and cowardice and courage, brutality 
and humanity, will refuse to denounce and condemn them? We are 
not of those who muzzle their conscience that the iniquities and vil- 
lainy of any man or party may go unbranded and unpunished. * * 
The killing of Matthews was a bloody, brutal murder, and the 
arrogant defense of the ugly crime by pretended Democrats cannot 
free it from the fatal stain. By what code of moral or political ethics 
are men who defend such crimes governed? — Vicksburg Post (Inde- 
pendent Democrat). 

The foregoing facts and Mr. Bailey's active participation in the 
crimes set forth will be supported in the three succeeding chapters 
by a reproduction in narrative form of the sworn testimony of fortv 
out of a hundred and thirty witnesses examined. The evidence will 
be taken from the U. S. Senate Report and will portray in graphic 
outline Mr. Bailey's real character in all its characteristic details. 



36 Senator J. IT. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 



CHAPTER IV. 
WHY BAILEY LEFT MISSISSIPPI (Continued). 

TESTIMONY. 

Appended to the reports of the Committee was a complete steno- 
graphic transcript of the proceedings from day to day, including 
699 pages of testimony which the author has carefully read, and from 
which the testimony of the following witnesses has been taken. The 
evidence is given verbatim except that it has been condensed, the 
questions and answers having been combined for the sake of brevity. 
A number of negroes were examined, but the author has refrained 
from reproducing the testimony of any other than whites. The 
witnesses were nearly all democrats. Mr. Bailey's name, by actual 
count, appears one hundred times throughout the pages of the re- 
report. 

Making every allowance for the impulsiveness of youth and con- 
sidered from an extreme southern standpoint, a young man might 
be drawn into merely joining a mob of the kind of which Mr. Bailey 
was the head; yet these considerations otifer no excuse for one of 
Bailey's ability and training in actively and aggressively organizing 
a mob for such lawlessness. 

In considering Mr. Bailey's conduct and connection with these 
outrages, it should be constantly borne in mind that Mississippi had 
been safely Democratic since iS/'), more than eight years before 
the lawlessness described in the instigation and perpetration of which, 
Captain Bailey and Major JVheeler participated. 

Miss Mary Matthews 

testified in substance, pages 61 to 63, as follows: 

I am 19 years old; live with my mother at Oxford; was at home 
in Hazlehurst about election time. I saw the mob come in town 
Monday morning. As they were going in, Mr. Meade and Mr. 
Hargrave went out and met them and came in with them. They rode 
in town and said they were not going on that side of the road; but 
they came on that side and went all through the town and then came 
back right by our house. In the evening they came to the foot of 



The Political Lifc-Stury of a Fallen Idol 37 

the bridge and stopped there and we thought they were all coming 
to the house, but our physician went to them and told them that my 
sister was very sick and asked them not to do it. They stopped there 
a while and then sent the resolutions by Mr. John McLemore, with 
reference to not allowing my father to vote. He told him that he 
was going to vote unless they murdered him; that he had as much 
right to as any of them and he was going to exercise his right. They 
went around town on Tuesday. They had their guns all the time. 
They fired a cannon. 

I did not know when my father left to vote until I went through 
the house to look for him and I went back and asked ma if he had 
gone; she said she reckoned so. I looked all through the house and 
could not see him anywhere and then I went out on the front porch 
and sat down and directly I heard a gun fire and I knew what it was 
as soon as I heard it. I went up town where he was and they had the 
front door locked. Mr. Coxwell, one of the inspectors, was outside 
with the door locked. He told me I could not go in there; I told 
him I was going in anyway; I did not care what he thought, that I 
was going in there; that it was none of his business. The door was 
still locked, and my uncle Leon came in a few minutes and they broke 
the door open then and we went in and found my father dead. 

I knew Mr. Wheeler; he and my father were on good terms. He 
traded at my father's store. 

My father was the most peaceable man I think I ever saw. He 
was always after people about saying things; always telling them that 
they talked too much and could not do them any good to say it and 
they might as well just keep it to themselves; that it was no use to go 
around saying anything, even if it was true. Just as we children got 
back from the burial, they brought the resolutions. [With reference 
to the Matthews family being beyond "the pale and protection of 
the law, common enemies of society;" the same resolution that "Cap- 
tain" Joe had spoken to.] 

Miss Jessie Matthews 

was sworn and testified in substance, pages 63 to 61;, as follows: 

I am another daughter of Mr. Print Matthews; am 16 years old; 
living with my mother at Oxford. I do not believe we will ever go 
back to Hazlehurst. I was there at the time of the election sick, 
confined to my bed. I am the sick daughter who has been talked 
about in this investigation. I saw the crowd on Monday; I heard 
them when they went out on Monday evening, and again after my 
father was killed. 

I know Mr. Burnet who stopped at our house for some length 
of time. The evening he was to go back (Tuesday evening) I heard 
about the crowd threatening Mr. Burnet and going to the train and 
iust hallooing. My brother sent a letter on the evening train to Mr. 
Burnet and my sister sent a dispatch later in the evening, advising 
him not to come back [Burnet was charged two months before, 



38 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

though he denied it, with the unpardonable sin of having "made 
sport of Mr. Bailey," for which crime he suffered from a gun-shot 
wound for five weeks. "Captain" Joe has always been a distin- 
guished character, not only above reproach, but above approach.] 
I never knew of my father having any difficulty with his neigh- 
bors, either Democrats or Republicans. He was not quarrelsome, 
but very quiet. He had one of the best dispositions I ever knew. 
He was a lame man. 

James M. Matthews 

was sworn and testified in substance, pages 113 to 122, as follows: 

I live about 15 miles southwest of Hazlehurst in Copiah County. 
Am a farmer and a brother of Print Matthews. About eleven^'clock 
on Tuesday they came to let me know that my brother was killed, 
and I went home and got my family and started for Hazlehurst. I 
was notified four or five miles from town that if I met the mob they 
would kill me; that evening I saw 25 or 35 men pass on with arms. 
I think most of them had shotguns. I saw men all over town with 
guns patrolling up and down. That night some 12 or 15 armed men 
came right to the railroad — my brother's house I suppose is 30 steps 
from the railroad — and got right opposite my brother's; we were sit- 
ting up there; the commanders [think of "Captain" Joe approaching 
this house with the corpse there] commanded them to halt; they 
stopped there and of all the language you ever heard, they used it 
[and yet "Captain" Joe said something last fall about looking "my 
Redeemer in the face"]. My brother was charitable, kept an open 
house, had many visitors, more than any other man in the county. He 
gave $100.00 I think just before he was killed to a Catholic church 
there that had been started; I heard them say so; they had but a few 
members there. 

My father had his gin burned up [after the election] on the place 
about four miles from where he lives. He has two places. His ten- 
ants have been run ofT. The burning of my father's gin grew out 
of those resolutions [to which "Captain" Joe spoke so eloquently the 
day that the family were burying their dead, displayed his six-shooter 
and declared it the best method of electioneering he had ever found 
yet] ; that was the trouble. 

Rev. W. G. Millsaps 

was sworn and testified in substance, pages 219 to 223, as follows: 

Have been living at Hazlehurst for the last two years. Have 
been 28 years in the Mississippi Conference, sometimes in one por- 
tion of the State and then in another, but always in the State of Mis- 
sissippi. Am a methodist clergyman. 

On Monday I heard a great noise. A whooping and cheering 
about three-fourths of a mile west of Hazlehurst. ["Captain" Joe 
must have been making them a speech about "burying my enemies"]. 
/ was in the parsonage, I went upstairs and listened and I suppose 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 39 

they remained there about an hour and thought perhaps it might be 
speaking down there. After an hour had transpired, 1 saw, i sup- 
pose, 150 men going up the street and they were all armed with guns 
and pistols, mounted on horses. They came up from the west and 
went around the square brandishing their pistols, riding up and down 
and I suppose in ten or fifteen minutes they went around the square 
and came back again and went on opposite the courthouse, and such 
was the excitement I felt alarmed. 

On Monday evening I heard some one speaking from the court- 
house where they stopped for sometime. I suppose they dispersed 
about an hour by the sun. That is what I saw of the mob. I heard 
Mr. Matthews' name called; they seemed to be excited [no doubt 
the leaders were excited, lest they should be prosecuted for the 
crimes upon which warrants had been issued for their arrest and they 
doubtless feared Mr. Matthews' influence with the grand jury con- 
cerning which other witnesses testified]. / had heard of their bein^ 
around in the country firing, beating and murdering before this, I 
suppose about ten days. I heard of the killing of a colored man by 
the name of Wallis, and several of the old servants I used to own 
came to me and complained and said they were driven off from 
their homes and houses and one man said that he had been shot in 
the shoulder. I heard all these rumors constantly from that time on. 

I heard there was to be speaking at the court house that night 
by Major Barksdale, whom I regarded as a man of integrity and 
proper feeling. I went to hear him and felt disappointed that he 
had not taken the opportunity to allay the feelings that had been 
evident. Not a word did he say to allay the excitement and prevent 
the troubles threatened by further acts of violence from this armed 
mob. That was my decided impression. I had voted for him before, 
not thinking that he was a radical man in his views, but after hearing 
that speaking, I could not vote again for him to represent this dis- 
trict in Congress. 

I have known Print Matthews ever since he was a boy; knew 
him w^ell; went to school with him, and then he went to school to me. 
His father and my father lived within two miles of each other. He 
was a very pleasant, peaceable, quiet, good man. I can say sincerely 
that he was as good a man as was in Hazlehurst, leaving out all idea 
of religion. He was generous and social in his disposition, even 
when a boy. His house was an open house for company. It was 
his habit to assist the several churches of the city; he gave $100.00 
to the Catholic church. I never knew him throughout his life to 
be quarrelsome or troublesome in any way. I think he was rather 
peaceful. He was a brave man, but I do not think aggressive at all. 
I heard him make his first speech of the campaign at the court house. 
There was nothing at all in the speech of an incendiary nature. 
Nothing to arouse the negroes. I have been a slave-holder. Owned 
about 60. I know the negro character well ; have lived with them 
all my life. I know a great many of the colored people in Copiah 

1—5 



40 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

County. / do not believe a Democrat in Copiah County believes 
that there is any danger of a negro insurrection. [This was just one 
of "Captain" Joe's fabrications to cover up his conduct, as he after- 
wards tried to cover up his political crimes in Texas.] 

I was in Hazlehurst the day Mr. Matthews was killed. There 
came a young man up from the depot and told me he was shot. I 
went and my wife started to follow me, and I told her to wait until 
I went down there. When I got to the hotel somebody remarked, 
"He never kicked." I went on and found him lying with his boots 
and clothes on, and a stream of blood on his face, before he was 
cold. I heard remarks that there was a dead line drawn at the 
bridge there, and I told them that I was of not much account; that 
I was going down there; that he was a friend of mine; and they said, 
of course as a minister, they had no objection [think, gentle reader, 
of the reverence of our "Captain" Joe], but they said that there 
was a dead line down there at the bridge. I saw Mr. Wheeler, the 
man who killed him, sitting at Mr. Subat's grocery. He had closed. 
Mr. Meade was with him. They were both sitting there, each with 
a double barrel gun in their laps. That was about 20 minutes after 
Mr. Matthews was killed. The mob gathered in there that day 
after Mr. Matthews was killed; there came a company from Crystal 
Springs [where "Captain" Joe had early donned the role of a bar- 
room bully] ; I heard the cannon firing — I did not know for what 
purpose; some of the mob came from Beauregard and some from 
Wesson, until the whole town seemed to be a military camp [such 
was the prowess and military leadership of our gifted "Captain" 
Joe]. / never saw an Independent with a musket, either then or 
before the election. I had no interest in the election. Mr. Matthews 
never said a word to me and I had no concern to vote. / did vote the 
Democratic ticket about five o'clock that evening. They were both 
called Democratic tickets, and I never paid much attention to the 
matter. I voted what they called the Democratic ticket. I did not 
understand that it was Bourbon. I will say this, that my mind was 
made up before that; but I did not feel like voting after I saw Mr. 
Matthews was killed; but having made up my mind before that, I 
voted. Neither Mr. Matthews nor his wife belonged to my church, 
though his father and mother and sisters did. 

Rev. Alexander A. Lomax 

was sworn and testified in substance, pages 227 to 233, as follows: 

/ am a minister of the gospel of the Baptist persuasion. Have 
lived in Hazlehurst ten years. Am a Democrat. I think I would 
be safe in saying that the Democrats and Independents all over our 
county are opposed to violence and in favor of law and order, 
but a small percentage of the Deinocrats of Copiah County was out 
in that mob; it is about the percentage of 100 to 2,500 of the total 
Democratic voters. My idea is that the orderly Democrats were 
unprepared for this mob, and did not expect it, and consequently 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 41 

could not organize and meet it, or else that they winked at it. It 
must have been one of the two. 

E. C. Williamson 

was sworn and testified in substance, pages 131 to 145: 

Have resided at Hazlehurst, Mississippi, about 15 years. Born 
in Mississippi. In politics I am a Democrat. Was mayor of Hazle- 
hurst last year and as such was ex-officio justice of the peace. 

I saw a little of the armed men who came into town on Monday 
before the election on Tuesday, November 6, 1883, mounted and 
armed with guns and pistols. Complaint was made to me officially 
by Dr. H. H. Barlow and T. E. Matthews, who made the affidavit 
charging certain parties with riding through Beat 3 disturbing 
people and their families — I believe the affidavit charged them with 
shooting and going to their houses at night. The parties who made 
the affidavit desired me to preserve the peace and have them arrested. 
The complaint was against about 25 men, I think, and for whom I 
issued warrants of arrest and placed in the hands of the sheriff, T. J. 
Hargrave. I do not know officially whether he arrested them or not. 
The warrant was never returned to me, and I did not try them. It 
was not prudent to undertake to try any of the men who were in that 
crowd for being in it ["Captain" Joe seems to have succeeded in bull- 
dozing Mississippi officers as he has later some people in Texas, 
especially those suppressors of truth sometimes called "investiga- 
tors" at Austin last winter]. There was somewhere between 100 and 
150 armed men around through town on the day prior to the elec- 
tion. 

I had heard at different times that there was a crowd of armed 
men around in that section of the country in Beat 3 firing guns and 
visiting different houses. Oh, yes, sir; I had heard of their beating 
and killing for some days before the election. 

Our citizens in town were very much in favor that peace and 
quiet should be restored. These people were in from the country 
[except "Captain" Joe and his noble friend, Major Wheeler, who 
lived in Hazlehurst], not town people. There might have been a 
few connected with the company from the town and I think there 
was, but our town people as a general thing were opposed to violence 
or disturbance. The better class of Democrats in Hazlehurst did 
not countenance the affair [and yet "Captain" Joe has always claimed 
to be the highest "class" Democrat]. I issued a proclamation call- 
ing upon the officers and citizens of the town to assist in seeing that 
law and order was restored again and guaranteeing to the citizens 
peace and quiet. That was on the 8th of November, and from that 
time on things became very quiet. 

Mr. Matthews was regarded as a very clever man, personally and 
socially. He was generous and a man who had a good many friends 
belonging to the different parties in the county. [Is it possible "Cap- 
tain" Joe Bailey was jealous of Matthews' popularity?] 



42 Senator J. IV . Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

[On Cross-examination.] 

It is a felony going to a residence and firing into the house and 
setting fire to houses where people live. I will state that after the 
election the sheriff and 1 had a conversation with others and in that 
conversation I thought at their suggestion that it was not advisable 
to have those parties arraigned and tried, and I agreed that he should 
not arrest the parties and bring them before me for two reasons. The 
crime was charged to have been committed in Beat 3 of the county 
in which I had no jurisdiction. [This is like "Captain" Joe getting 
out of borrowing money from the Waters-Pierce Oil Company by 
borrowing it from Pierce, its president.] Next, that the excitement 
had prevailed so that I thought best not to try them, and my consent- 
ing, I reckon, is the reason why the warrant was not returned into 
court. [And thus did "Captain" Joe Bailey, the boastful bulldozer, 
escape trial for a number of felonies, and yet (according to his own 
words) his late associate trust masters "ought to be put in stripes."] 

J. P. Matthews was present at the time that Dr. Barlow and T. E. 
Matthews swore to the affidavits that had been written at my desk 
by Mr. Burnet. Captain Hargrave told me of offering to deputize 
Print Matthews to arrest that mob. I would say that I think Cap- 
tain Hargrave did not mean to have him appointed solely to be 
murdered. Ras. Wheeler was put under a $5,000 bond to appear 
before the next term of Criminal Court, which meets in April. Mur- 
der is not a bailable offense in Mississippi. 

Richard Coxwell 

was sworn and testified in part, pages 162 to 168, as follows: 

Live two and a half miles east of Hazlehurst. Was one of the 
Democratic inspectors for the precinct where Mr. Matthews was 
killed. I do not think a large majority of the Democratic party of 
Copiah County countenance or endorse acts of violence or lawless- 
ness. There may be a few of that number in that county. [Such as 
"Captain" Joe] I think they are opposed to such as a general sen- 
timent. 

Dr. a. B. Pitts 

was sworn and testified in substance, pages 168 to 170, as follows: 

Live in Hazlehurst. I know Ras. Wheeler; I had a conversa- 
tion with him touching the killing of Mr. Matthews at the Hazle- 
hurst hotel. I went to the depot to get the paper from New Orleans 
— the Times-Democrat — I believe I got both papers, one for myself 
and one for Mr. Wheeler. We were reading the account of the 
killing, and I made the observation relative to the statement of the 
Times-Democrat that Wheeler and Matthews were enemies — when 
I read that part of the narrative I stopped and asked him. I said, 



The PoFitical Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 43 

"Ras., that is not so, is it?" and he said, "No; we have always been 
on very friendly terms." We began to read again. He remarked, 
"No." He said, "We have always been on very friendly terms," 
and I believe he said that Mr. Burnet knew that they had always 
been very friendly. He described the different positions that they 
occupied at the place where he was standing when he shot him. Yes, 
I might say that he said that he killed him. Before leaving, he told 
me that he and Matthews had had a conversation just as Matthews 
came into the place, and I asked him about that, having heard it 
before. It occurs to me that he told me that he requested Mr. 
Matthews not to vote. I do not say there was any altercation between 
he and Matthews at all. 

I was the surgeon who attended Mr. Burnet [the day Charley 
Hart shot him for denying that he had made sport of "Captain" 
Joe]. Burnet came into my office to settle the bill after he was well 
and out, and I told him of the conversation that took place between 
me and Wheeler. I do not remember asking Ras. [Wheeler] his 
reasons for killing him, why he did do it, but I remember that part 
of that conversation wherein he told me that after the crowd passed 
the resolution instructing him [Matthews] not to vote and he sent 
back word he would vote, that he, Wheeler, was delegated either by 
lot or vote to kill him if he did vote. He said to me in so many 
words that it was by lot that it fell upon him to do it. [Suppose it 
had fallen to the lot of "Captain" Joe? Would Texas have been 
cursed with the scandal and disgrace that this has brought upon us?]' 

Mr. Matthews came to me one morning in the hotel, I think on 
Monday previous to the election, and called me into the hotel parlor 
and told me that he had some fears about his safety; that he had been 
informed that parties were coming into town and that // was their 
purpose to murder him and his family. I tried to assure him that it 
was a false conception on his part. I told him that I had heard 
nothing of the sort and that I did not think it could be true. But 
he was very uneasy and requested me to go and see the sheriff. I 
did go in company with Mr. Day, at that time a citizen of Hazle- 
hurst. 

Joseph B. Jones 

sworn and examined, testified in substance, pages 122 to 131 : 

I reside in Copiah County, state of Mississippi, and have so 
resided since my infancy, except three years temporarily out of the 
state, about 25 years old. In 1883 I was a member of the Board of 
Supervisors, and president of that board. Their duties are the same 
as County Commissioners in other states. I knew J. P. Matthews 
from infancy up, except about three years I lived in Louisiana I lost 
sight of him. He was but a youth then and went to school to me 
when he was about ten years old. As a citizen, there were none bet- 
ter. He was a peaceable, law-abiding citizen. He was a man who 



44 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

would resent an insult, although physically he was a weakly man and 
a cripple, but he was high strung, proud and ambitious. He was 
generous to a fault, and charitable, contributing to all the churches 
and schools; among the most liberal men in the county. He was a 
man of considerable means; a man that could always command' 
means and for the last 15 or 20 years was a man of means. I heard 
Mr. Matthews make a great many speeches before the war and a 
great many since. I never heard him proclaim any doctrine that 
was wrong or advise the colored people or anybody else to do any- 
thing wrong. 

Yes, sir; it is customary for the defeated party to charge that the 
other party cheated them, but it is not customary to inaugurate such 
a steal [and yet "Captain" Joe said that he "never stole any ballots 
nor allowed anybody else to steal them"] for carrying elections as 
they inaugurated here in this last election ; that is a new departure. 

It has never been customary in our county to make demonstra- 
tions of that kind — firing off guns, that I know of, except in Hazle- 
hurst. When an election was over, I heard cannons fired there. The 
successful party would have a little jollification, but not go around to 
people's houses. 

I wish to state now, gentlemen, and I want it distinctly under- 
stood that / am not a Republican; I never was a Republican and I 
feel very reluctant to say that I ever was a Democrat, and I do not 
think I ever shall be again. I cannot be a Mississippi Democrat. 
["Captain" Joe Bailey Democrat. How many "Captain" Joe Bailey 
Texas Democrats will there be when this controversy is ended?] 
I was an oldtime Whig until after the war and after the war I fell 
in with the Democratic party. I stuck to them until along about 
1875, when I fell out with them and since that time I have been an 
Independent Democrat. / want it distinctly understood that I am 
not a Republican. In Mississippi a man does not dare to scratch 
his ticket; he must vote the Simon Pure Democratic ticket or he is 
denounced [by "Captain" Joe Bailey to this good day]. In the 
election in 1875 — known as the shotgun election, in Yazoo County, 
Mississippi — there was not much shotgun in it in our county 
[Copiah]. I do not think there was anything like hostility in our 
county [that was the election when the carpet-baggers were over- 
thrown throughout the state, and yet they hadn't anything like hos- 
tility in Copiah County that year. Why should it have remained 
for "Captain" Joe Bailey and his associates, eight years later, to wake 
up to this necessity?] 

The Democrats last fall were trying to get up some rumors that 
the negroes had entered into a great conspiracy to rise up and murder 
the whites, but it was all gotten up by the Democratic party; there 
was no ground for any such rumors. They would have it that 
Matthews was trying to array the negroes against the whites and all 
that sort of thing. / know it was not true. I heard him tell the 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 45 

negroes too often from the stump and from private conversation that 
if it ever came to a collision of races, they would find him with the 
whites. I have heard him tell it to them in his speeches and have 
heard him tell it to them in conversation. 

Rowan B. Rilas 

was sworn and testified in substance, pages 340 to 344, as follows: 

I do not belong to the Democratic club at Hazlehurst. I always 
voted the Democratic ticket, except as to Mr. Matthews, and that 
barred me. I do not think he ever had a dollar too good for anybody 
if they wanted it. He w^as full of generosity, an intelligent, active 
business man. 

J. H. HURD 

was sworn and examined, testifying in substance, as follows, pages 
349 to 354: 

Now I live in New Orleans; formerly in Copiah County. I 
was in Mr. Hogg's grocery store Tuesday night, and said I cannot 
iind out what Matthews was killed for. I asked him if he knew what 
Wheeler killed him for, and he said that there were no hard feel- 
ings between Matthews and Wheeler. I think he said two weeks 
before the election Wheeler and his brother were staying on his 
[Hogg's] place and he [Wheeler] said that Jack Wheeler and Ras. 
Wheeler had gone to Hargrave to borrow some money and he had 
refused and that he had gone to Matthews and got the money; and 
he went on to say that he had pledged himself to Beat 3 to kill 
Matthews. Mr. Hogg told me, himself, before the crowd that was 
in there, that Wheeler said he had nothing against Matthews, but 
that he had pledged himself to Beat 3 to kill him, and that he had 
done it and was not ashamed of it. I think Hogg is a Democrat. I 
told him if that was the case, it was cold blooded murder, if there 
were no hard feelings between them and he had pledged himself to 
Beat 3. After 1 had stayed in there a few minutes, I started towards 
the depot and got about half way and a part of this crowd, six or 
eight, met me about half way from the depot to Hogg's grocery and 
three of them presented their pistols at me and said I had to take 
back what I had said. / told them I would, under the circumstances. 
All I had said was that it was a cold-blooded murder. This crowd 
also told me I would have to leave. After I had talked with two or 
three parties [friends] they told me I had better leave, and that 
"if you think it is a cold-blooded murder, you keep your mouth shut 
the way times is now." I says, "If a man cannot express his opinion, 
it is a poor country. I am going to leave here in a week or so any- 
way, and then I can say what 1 please." 

Frank M. Sessions 
was sworn and testified in substance, pages 364 to 368, as follows: 

I heard the long resolutions with reference to the Matthews 
family read. I was present when they were adopted. Yes, sir; there 



46 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

was a speech made there that day [this was by "Captain" Joe] when 
the resolutions were read Major Barry got up and there was a heap 
of shouts, so that you could scarcely hear him at times. He proposed 
that they strike out the clause of the resolution that held the Matthews 
family and relatives responsible for any violence that might occur 
to individuals or other parties. I could hear many persons say, "No, 
no, no," and Major Barry seemed to sit down. At any rate, he 
hushed, and awhile after there was quietness. Major Barry got up 
a second time and commenced to talk about it and they drowned 
him out again with "No." They then put the resolutions to the 
house and a good, large voice [perhaps "Captain" Joe's voice] said 
"Yes." Joe Bailey is the person who spoke. Bailey's speech was 
long and tedious. He said, "My friends, you have won a great vic- 
tory." He says, "Democrats we were, and Democrats we are." He 
says, "We have got a Democratic stock of officers," and he says, "By 
the next election we hope to have a Democratic Congress." And 
something about that way he spoke along something in moderation. 
And some persons by this time hallowed out to the left of the house 
from where I was — I was back in the rear, they were in front of me 
— "Tell us what they done in Beat 3." I do not think that Bailey 
said anything in regard to Beat 3 prior to that time. And they 
shouted then, several hallowed, and after that abated he says, "Now, 
I will tell you something about Beat 3." He says, "I went down in 
Beat 3, nie and my friend, IVheeler," and he says, "I had thought to 
stump the Beat, but," he says, "after I got down there in a portion of 
that country we came to the conclusion that I could do more in the 
saddle than I could on the stump. Therefore, we went around to 
electioneer." He then says, "And I tell you," he says, "when we 
started out we took along with us something like this." About the 
time he said that I could see an opening in the crowd ahead, and he 
pulled out a pistol, I took it to be — a good, long one. He says, "We 
took along something like this." Then he put it back in his bosom. 
Many persons laughed then. He never stopped his discourse, and 
went on saying a few words in regard to electioneering, and, he 
says, "/ tell you, my friends, it is the best method of electioneering I 
ever have seen." The crowd laughed. There was some cheering 
then. There was some laughter and some hallowed. "Well," he 
says, "I wanted to tell you about our electioneering." And he went 
on and he says, "My friend JVheeler is a noble hand to electioneer." 
He says, "We would go down," and he says, "we would come to 
a house, and my friend Wheeler would get right down and go right 
in and take a seat right by the fire with those persons," and he said, 
"He would electioneer a few minutes, and they most invariably 
agreed to vote the ticket before we left." Then he had some applause. 
Then they asked him, "Did you hurt anybody?" That voice was 
heard in the crowd. He says, "Oh, no; we didn't hurt anybody." 
["Captain" Joe evidently became a member of the Ananias Club 
early in his political career.] 



The Political Lifc-Slory of a Fallen Idol A7 

Mr. Bailey said in his speech that it would be well for some 
person to go around and see those people who affiliated with the 
opposite party and were voting different or were willing to vote 
different, and encourage them to come together and vote with us; 
and I do not remember the words, but there were several words said 
in regard to asking them to turn out and as he wound up that passage 
of his speech, he said, "If they agree to come back and vote with us, 
grant them oil courtesy and be peaceable with them [listen at the 
sage-like advice of this "Captain" Joe] ; but in the event they should 
fail," he says, "then what shall we do?" The house cried out then 
in much tones, "Kill them out, kill them out." It was all gloomy 
before me, so many persons that I could not see who it was, but there 
was a loud voice said, "Kill them out," after the cheering subsided. 
Then Bailey said, ''''No, I would not advise you to kill them out, but," 
he said, "/ believe you will do it without advice." Nothing was said 
about a Democratic president. It was only the next time that he 
thought we would have a Democratic Congress ["Captain" Joe was 
thinking about Congress even at this early period in his political 
career]. 

/ have never been a Republican. I was in the Confederate army. 
In the speech Bailey spoke of some grievance that had been caused 
by the family, something in regard to having persons arrested some 
long time before. [The witness appears to have misunderstood this 
reference in the confusion, as "Captain" Joe was perhaps more inter- 
ested in the grievance with reference to the then proposed arrest of 
himself and his associate bulldozers.] 

John B. Middleton 

was sworn and testified in substance, pages 406 to 422, as follows: 

Have lived in Copiah County all my life. I am a farmer. I do 
not know who drew the resolutions with reference to the Matthews 
family on Wednesday after his death. I do not recollect hearing 
that Mr. George S. Doods did. I recollect distinctly asking my son 
[who was in the mob more or less] one day if he knew who drew 
up those resolutions on that day, and he said he did not for certain, 
but it occurs to me he said that Mr. Bailey and some other young 
man there did it. I said that some of it was a very weak thing, and 
I did not think a lawyer did it [if Bailey did draw them, there is 
still doubt as to whether or not they were drawn by "a lawyer"]. 

L. F. BiRDSONG 

was sworn and testified in substance, pages 277 to 286, as follows : 

I live at Hazlehurst. Was present at the meeting that passed 
these resolutions after the death of Mr. Matthews. I went down 
about middle-ways of the court house and told Mr. Sexton [a lawyer] 
that excitement was running high. And he came right out to make 
a speech and about that time Major Barry [the ex-member of the 
Mississippi Legislature] got up and offered some resolutions that 



48 Senator J. W. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

were conciliatory, and he was hissed down at once, and Mr. Sexton 
then refused to say anything. A majority of the people and the 
majority of the Democrats of that county did not participate in it or 
have anything at all to do with it. A large majority of the Demo- 
cratic party of Copiah County utterly condemned any violence. 
[This was a partisan Democratic witness.] It was simply the ebulli- 
tion of an excited multitude [wrought into fury by the matchless 
eloquence and splendid statesmanship of "Captain" Joe, now better 
known as Coal Oil Joe] ; and some of the men were full of whisky. 
It was a mixed multitude, some of the best men in the county and 
some of the very worst. [Wonder how "Captain" Joe will like this?] 
Captain Barry objected, but they forced him down. I was using my 
influence to try to get a different state of affairs brought about. I did 
not want those resolutions passed or published. I used what influence 
I had, and saw I was powerless and I stopped. While the resolutions 
were assented to [the resolutions for the adoption of which "Captain" 
Joe made his famous speech], they were not unanimously adopted. 
I have heard Judge Cooper, formerly of Hazlehurst, now one of 
the judges of the Supreme Court, disapprove that. He said it was 
very unfortunate [but "Captain" Joe was wiser even then than mem- 
bers of the Supreme Court of Mississippi]. No, sir; I do not think 
that two of my sons were in the mob. One of them went away against 
my wishes [perhaps "Captain" Joe coaxed him ofi and promised him 
a seat in Congress at some future time]. I knew nothing about it. 
/ am very sorry that he went; I did not want him to go. I think he 
had been in Beat 3. I suppose he came into Hazlehurst with the 
procession on Monday. I did not see him when he came in. I am 
one of the sureties on Wheeler's bond, as are Mr. Higdon and Mr. 
Ellis, the latter a brother-in-law of mine. [No wonder it was hard 
to enforce the law against that mob when its leaders, like "Captain" 
Joe, had enticed the sons of good men like this one to follow their 
fortunes.] // is my opinion that the better portion of the Democratic 
party disapproved of these offenses. Mr. Matthews did, through his 
influence with the Supervisors have a very considerable influence 
tn the selection of grand jurors of our county. [And this was what 
worried "Captain" Joe.] 

J. S. Sexton, Esq. 

of Hazlehurst, Copiah County, a partisan Democrat who ap- 
peared as one of the lawyers for the defense (so to speak), testified 
(pages LXXI to LXXXI) in substance, as follows: 

Have lived in Hazlehurst four years; I am a member of the 
bar; I know Mr. Joe Bailey. I heard the exceedingly violent, excit- 
able and inflammatory speech that he was said to have made. I 
heard Mr. Bailey make two speeches. On Saturday night he had 
been down in Beat 3. Mr. Bailey came in about nine o'clock at 
night, immediately after this excitement on the streets in reference 
to these warrants for the men to be arrested. He came in and made 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 49 

a speech to the club that night. I heard Mr. Bailey make that state- 
ment in reference to what they had done down in Beat 3. On the 
day after the killing, I remember the speech made by Mr. Bailey 
and I was very much astonished to hear the testimony of someone 
here yesterday in reference to it. Mr. Bailey did jerk out his pistol, 
but in this connection, and 1 was very much astonished to find Mr. 
Bailey there with a pistol on him. He said, "They accuse us of being 
bulldozers, and all that sort of thing," and he says, "This is the kind 
of instruments they persuade our friends with down in Beat 3," 
pulling out a pistol and speaking of the opposition, and the only 
demonstration made by Democrats was in response to just such 
appeals as that. [Either this witness was lying (or mistaken), or 
every other witness lied. He probably was, as to what Bailey said 
about this six-shooter, or possibly Bailey was lying about their opera- 
tions, for nowhere in the testimony can it be shown that "the opposi- 
tion" had resorted to violence.] / think thai was uncalled for and 
unbecoming, because he is a man of intelligence and I was surprised 
to see him jerk out his pistol. 

I was very much opposed to the passage of the resolutions and 
tried to speak against them, but just about the time I was getting up 
in the audience there was an old gentleman of our county there who 
has lived in the county a long time and represented the county in the 
Legislature, got up to say something against it and I saw from the 
disposition of the crowd that I could not do anything. I know a very 
large majority of the people of that county do not endorse those 
resolutions [and yet "Captain" Joe did]. Yes, I saw what they term 
here a mob. 

Major Barry did not undertake to speak at any considerable 
length; he declined to speak; he got up and said, "I object to the 
passage of these resolutions. I am willing to hold a man for all that 
he does, but I am not willing to go so far as to say what those resolu- 
tions do say, that they will hold him responsible for whatever crimes 
may be committed in the community." I heard Mr. Bailey's speech 
when he flourished the pistol [Wednesday after the election and 
assassination on Tuesday], and I also heard a speech of his a few 
days before the election, on Saturday night, when he came in from 
Beat 3, wherein he said that he heard there was a warrant for 
his arrest. Air. Bailey said he understood there was a warrant for his 
arrest; that he was to be arrested as a common vagabond and dis- 
turber of the peace [and such he was, or all the rest of the witnesses 
belong to the Ananias Club, and Bailey's word was to be taken, as he 
has since wanted it to be taken in Texas, without proof of its verity]. 

After these resolutions were passed, which I considered very 
unjust towards the Matthews family, and unjust towards ourselves, 
I thought if there was a mass meeting (because the other was not a 
mass meeting) [it was just a meeting of the mob], and they would 
pass resolutions regretting the circumstances that had arisen and 
would say that these resolutions were not the sentiment of the people, 



50 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

it would be a good thing and 1 think so yet. / was perfectly aston- 
ished ivlien I heard of it. I never dreamed of Mr. Matthews being 
killed. 

James S. Sexton 

Attorney for the Defense, was sworn and testified in part, pages 575 
to 589, as follows: 

On the day of the election a young man named Bill Higdon [one 
of "Captain" Joe's lieutenants] came in from Spencer's Mill very 
much excited, and Mr. Joe Bailey, Pooler Britton, and sev- 
eral others got horses and went out there for the purpose of assisting 
our friends in the event there was a general conflict there. They 
had no idea of making a disturbance, I think. [And yet "Captain" 
Joe told them after they had gotten down there and found that it was 
a false alarm, that "they had ridden entirely too far not to do any- 
thing"; so that the Independent majority of 70 at twelve o'clock was 
reduced to a total Independent vote of 21 to 24, and the Democratic 
majority placed at 80 when "Captain" Joe and his crowd "had done 
something."] 

I know that I saw Mr. Bailey and Mr. Britton and a num- 
ber of others going out. I think when the appeal came in they vol- 
unteered their services [and as usual in such lawless matters, "Cap- 
tain" Joe took charge]. 

William Oliver 

was sworn and testified in substance, pages 290 to 293, as follows: 

[This witness was a partisan Democrat and introduced by the 
Democrats, as a great many of the witnesses were.] 

I live at Wesson, Copiah County. Have lived there 13 years. 
I am secretary and treasurer of the Mississippi Mills at Wesson. 
I only heard that there were men going around electioneering, but I 
did not know who they were. / did not approve of this bulldozing. 
I have opposed it. I believe in managing things peaceable and law- 
ful. Of course, in the Democratic party, as well as in any other party 
in any country, they have some of the bad element ["Captain" Joe's 
element], but I think the majority of them are the best element 
among the white people. I do not mean to say that that covers the 
entire voting population of the county, but the intelligent and best 
element are in favor of law and order. I have talked with a great 
many who regret anything else except having done things in a peace- 
able, lawful and quiet way. That is my opinion of our people. 
[But not "Captain" Joe's.] 

J. M. Norman 

was sworn and testified in substance, pages 300 to 309, as follows: 

I was born in Copiah County; have lived there all my life, nearly 
51 years; was chancery clerk for seven years preceding the first Mon- 
day in last January. 



The Political Life-Story of a fallen Idol 51 

Yes, I knew some of the persons who were engaged in that mob 
or procession, as some people prefer to call it. [Wonder if "Captain" 
Joe prefers the softer name?] I will give you those 1 recollect hav- 
ing seen. 1 saw them come into town. A young man named Bailey 
was one. He was a Democrat. The Democrats were election- 
eering sort of all together then. They were not mixing with the 
Independents at that time [except with shot and shell, it seems]. I 
know a good many of them if I could just think of them now. Mr. 
Womack, I recollect was one; Mr. Ras. Wheeler was with them; I 
saw Mr. Shelton, I believe. I learned more from a speech that Mr. 
Bailey made that night than any other way. [We have no detailed 
report of this Monday night speech, but have a detailed report of 
the one made on Wednesday after the assassination on Tuesday.] He 
told me in his speech — he said that they had been down there elec- 
tioneering — that they had hauled a cannon around and shot it ofif 
and would fire off the guns on the road and they would go to the 
negroes' houses and call them up and electioneer with them. [The 
author has omitted the testimony of several negroes, ex-slaves, who 
appeared before the committee with their evidently truthful accounts, 
horrible, excruciating, painful and repulsive in the extreme. Harm- 
less, helpless, old ex-slaves, respectful and polite, were treated more 
cruelly than beasts of burden. The profanity of the mob on their 
nightly raids, as rehearsed by these witnesses, was low, offensive and 
revolting.] Yes, / heard Bailey make a speech that evening. The 
parties were armed when they came in town, some had guns and some 
had pistols. 

J. H. Thompson 

was sworn and testified in substance, pages 315 to 327, as follows: 

I have lived in Copiah County 60 years or over, at Beauregard, 
ten miles south of Hazlehurst. I understood one of my nephews was 
in that procession. I am very sorry that some of those resolutions 
were passed. I thought it would do no good. For instance, where 
they said they were going to send to organize the negroes [that the 
Matthews were]. I told them that that was unnecessary, because I 
did not believe that the Matthews did organize the negroes. I do 
not believe it. [This witness was not personally friendly to Mr. 
Matthews, either. The mob simply built up these men of straw to 
hide behind.] Yes, sir; I know J. W. Bailey, as they call him. My 
acquaintance with him is limited. I have known him for a short 
time. I did not know him at all, hardly. I never heard anything 
against him at all until I heard that he was in with what you call this 
mob. I did not approve of the election of Ras. Wheeler as marshal 
of Hazlehurst. I think the councilmen were like this mob, in that 
they acted under excitement. [There was no excitement when the 
mob was organized by "Captain" Joe and his associates, although 
there was before they were through with it.] I think now — my opin- 
ion is I have not heard them say — I think these same gentlemen [the 



52 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

city councilmen], if they were called upon to elect a marshal, would 
not elect Ras Wheeler. No, sir ; they denied having any Republican 
ticket, that is the ones I talked to. It was an Independent ticket 
entirely. The most of the men who composed it were formerly Dem- 
ocrats. No national politics were involved. It was altogether a 
local election, and the canvass was conducted between the Independ- 
ent party and the Democratic party. 

Amos W. Burnet 

chairman of Independent Executive Committee, was called as a 
witness for prosecution: 

[Mr. Burnet is now a practicing lawyer in Kansas City, Mis- 
souri, and from him the author received a letter in which he says: 
"In regard to Mr. J. Weldon Bailey's record while in Mississippi, 
it was anything but reputable."] Mr. Burnet, pages 26 to 57, testified 
in substance, as follows: 

I was formerly a resident of Hazlehurst; was 31 years old the 
1 2th day of this month; am a lawyer; have been practicing for three 
years; born in an adjoining county to Copiah, Hines County; have 
lived in Copiah since January, 1879; am very well acquainted with 
the people of Copiah County. Was a nominee for the State Senate 
in 1881. Was chairman of the Independent Executive Committee 
of Copiah County. 

On the 6th of September, having returned from Jackson, where 
I went with Mr. Print Matthews to oppose the appointment of an 
illiterate negro to the position of Supervisor or Inspector of Elec- 
tion, I left my room and was passing the corner of the hotel. A 
kind of dead-head of a young fellow around there that did nothing, 
by the name of Charles Hart, remarked to me, "I understand that 
you say you didn't make sport of Bailey the other night." [What a 
crime even in that early day I] I remarked to him that I did not and 
furthermore I could prove that I never mentioned Bailey's name. 
He remarked, "You are a g — d — liar," and commenced drawing his 
pistol. His pistol caught in his pocket and I got hold of my knife 
and made a lick at him and he ran about 50 yards away and I saw 
that he was going to shoot me, and just as I got to the door he shot 
me through the groin. I think there were about three men standing 
near him when he first came up, all right in a group, and just as I 
came along they spread. After what took place, I concluded they 
spread for the purpose of killing me whichever way I went. Hart 
was standing right at the corner of the hotel and Bailey and another 
fellow Stood here (indicating) at an angle of about 45 degrees, so 
that as I got in front of Hart, Bailey would be at my back, so that 
if I attempted to shoot him, he [Bailey] would shoot me in the back. 
I was confined to my bed for five weeks. 

On Saturday evening preceding the election they [the mob] shot 
Frank Hays and his wife. They came to me. I went to Captain 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 53 

Hargrave; Mr. Matthews was along with me, and I appealed to 
him; I repeat my language to him; 1 said, "My God, Captain, are 
you going to sit here, the peace officer of this county, having taken 
the oath to preserve the peace, and let these people be murdered and 
outraged in any such way?" I said, "You are not only violating your 
oath, but you are failing to come to the rescue of suffering humanity." 
He remarked to me, "He could do nothing without an affidavit." At 
this time Mr. T. E. Matthews, a merchant in Beat 3, came in; they 
had driven him from his store and he reported to me that they had 
shot some half dozen holes in his house and one ball just missed his 
head. Hargrave having told me he could do nothing without affi- 
davits, I went before the mayor and drew up the affidavit myself, 
and Ed. Matthews and Mr. Barlow, too, signed it. On the filing of 
that affidavit, the mayor issued a warrant. I stood there and saw 
him issue it. He placed that warrant in the hands of the sherifif and 
that warrant has never been returned to this day; I have that from 
Mr. Williamson. I was attorney in the case and I know it was not 
returned while I was there. The identical men against whom this 
affidavit was made on Sunday morning — T. J. Hargrave was stand- 
ing on the street — and he sent those identical men back into Beat 3 
with guns to put down the mob. I have got the names of those men 
in my pocket. These are the names who were incorporated in that 
affidavit and against whom the charge was preferred for outraging 
citizens in Beat 3 : E. B. Wheeler, the man who murdered Matthews ; 
J. W . Bailey ["Captain" Joe, of bulldozer fame, both then and now], 
J. W. Purcer, Ruben Morrison, Charles Hart (that is the man who 
shot me), J. F. Thompson, Marion McCree, Joel East, Frank Davis, 
Emmitt Spencer, J. B. Middleton, Bill Higdon, J. F. Wood. 

There on that [Sunday] morning, when we were standing on 
the street, Mr. Bailey remarked that there had been a warrant issued 
for him, but that he did not propose to be arrested until after the 
election, that he had important business to attend to [just as he had 
last winter when he wanted to go to Washington instead of contin- 
uing the investigation]. Mr. Bailey remarked that he had important 
business to attend to before the election. That he was then going 
out to quell the mob [the idea of "Captain" Joe quelling a mob that 
he, himself, had organized]. They went on to the country then on 
Sunday morning. A few hours after that I heard the cannon shoot- 
ing about ten or fifteen miles away. He [Bailey] returned then on 
Monday. They went to Beat 3 on Sunday and they did not come 
back until Monday. When they returned they returned with a mob 
of 1^0. [Another witness testified that Bailey was at the head of 
this mob as they approached the town of Hazlehurst.] We heard 
the cannon and the shooting of guns for an hour before they reached 
the town. As they passed the corner just opposite the residence of 
Mr. Matthews, myself and his family were sitting there. His daugh- 
ter counted the shotguns, the number of men who had guns. My 
recollection is that she counted 90. The balance of them had pistols 



54 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

buckled around them in army style. Some of tliem had them on the 
horns of the saddles. They then marched down to the southern por- 
tion of South street, and up around by the court house, and in making 
the second circuit they passed on the west side of the railroad about 
150 yards from Mr. Matthews' front gate. As they passed there we 
were still sitting on the gallery and one and then another would 
halloo out that "somebody had better get away from here" ; "some- 
body was mighty sick," or something like that. In the meantime, Mr. 
Matthews had gone to some of the leading citizens there and told 
them that his daughter was in a critical condition and that he would 
hate for this armed mob to come to his house and disturb his family, 
and he talked to Dr. Pitts. Dr. Pitts agreed to go and intercede and 
for God's sake not to let them come to his house and disturb his fam- 
ily. Dr. Otis was another man who went. They marched down the 
street then and just in front of the store of J. P. Matthews they 
stopped and held a consultation some fifteen or twenty minutes. 
They handed John McLemore a paper and he loped of¥ to Mr. 
Matthews' residence with it. I asked him what Mr. McLemore was 
doing up there. He said, "He came to serve a resolution on me to 
tell me that I must stay at home tomorrow and that I must not vote. 
I told him that they had it in their power to murder me, but that 
I am going to vote tomorrow unless you do kill me." When Mc- 
Lemore returned to them they filed left and marched out west of 
town in military style. That was about five o'clock in the afternoon. 

On Monday night then, after they had gone out of town, they 
came back and they were speaking at the court house again that 
night. A company of them passed over the bridge going east. I do 
not know where they went, only what was the current report and 
not denied by anybody as to what they did that night. [Burned the 
church.] At a quarter past eleven Monday night I left the resi- 
dence of Mr. Matthews and I went to the depot to take the train 
to go to Crystal Springs. 

For twelve days preceding the election it was just an armed mob 
over that country. They didn't hesitate to say, / heard Bailey say, 
that "We are going to carry the election or kill you Independent 
Republicans; we are going to have these offices or kill them," that) 
is the expression they used on the street. It was a reign of terror. 
IFe sat every night expecting that mob to come there and take us 
out and kill us. Every day there would come a report to Hazlehurst 
of outrages committed during those two weeks. They came to me 
from Beat 3 and told me their crops were destroyed in the field; that 
they were sleeping in the woods; that they were afraid to stay in 
their houses. 

On Monday they broke up the meeting of our Executive Com- 
mittee in Hazlehurst. They came right in front of the hall where 
we were holding our meetings and one of them hollowed, "Look out, 
\ve have got it loaded with shot," and they turned it right loose at the 
store and the filling or wadding of the cannon fell on the pavement 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 55 

in front of his store and then one fellow remarked, "Lets put in a 
log chain and shoot the damned thing all to pieces." [Texans, do 
you suppose that was "Captain" Joe? It sounds like him.] The 
men against whom affidavits were then pending, and for whose arrest 
warrants had been issued, took these identical guns and went out to 
conciliate the mob. 

The first outrage of a notorious character was the shooting into 
Matthews' store [in the country] ; the killing of Tom Wallis and the 
shooting of his wife; the pursuit of Frank M. Bufkin, a member of 
the Board of Supervisors, hunting him to kill him. Another case 
was the shooting of Frank Hayes and his wife. That was notorious 
and not denied by anyone. It was talked about all over Hazlehurst; 
I will tell you something else right there in connection with that 
church. On that evening I recognized t/ie voices of Mr. Bailey and 
Mr. Wirt Norman [Norman was one of the fellows against whom 
a complaint had been sworn out for burning Daniel Crump's house], 
as they passed the residence of Mr. Matthews, going in that direc- 
tion, on the night of the 2 1st when the church was burned. These 
same men the night previous, that had broken up the meeting at the 
church, were in the crowd. Mr. Bailey has a very peculiar voice; it 
IS a deep baritone, and a person who has once heard it will always 
recognize it wherever he hears it. 

The next outrage that I remember was the hanging of Napoleon 
Demars' son. This man was in his house and they got pretty close 
to it before he heard them [the mob] and he jumped and hid between 
the mattress and the bed. They took his little son and they hung him 
up to make him tell where his father was. He finally told them 
where his father was and they then pulled him out of bed and they 
took him out and with menaces and threats they made him take an 
oath that he would support Hargrave and the entire Democratic 
ticket. ["Captain" Joe was evidently laying the predicate for an 
early race for Congress.] 

Daniel Crump came to me a few days before the election, on 
Saturday preceding Tuesday, the 6th of November, and I made the 
affidavit for him against the parties who burned his house in the 
night at about eleven o'clock. They shot at him as he made his 
escape from the burning house. He recognized two of the men who 
were in the mob [Little and Norman, the latter being the party 
who was seen with Bailey going in the direction of the church the 
night it was burned], and the affidavit was made against those two. 
He said there was some fifteen or twenty in the crowd. 

At Gallman we had an inspector that we had recommended for 
our inspector at that box, Mr. B. F. Burrage, a white man, but they 
[the mob] concluded they would appoint a colored man named Dave 
Bell. They took him out on Monday night and gave him a thrash- 
ing and then on the day of the election they took the ballot box from 
him [and yet "Captain" Joe told the Greenville people October i, 
1906, that although he was in this riot, he never stole "any ballots 
1—6 



56 Senator J. W. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

nor allowed anyone else to steal any ballots." Isn't it queer how Mr. 
Bailey has a way of "anticipating"?]. 

In going from Hazlehurst to Crystal Springs on Monday night 
before the election on Tuesday, I met on the train an old friend, R. 
G. Wingate, who spoke to me and said, "I am so glad to see you on 
here and leaving Hazlehurst." I said, "Why?" He says, "Miller 
made a speech in Wesson tonight and he is a party to this whole 
business. He [Miller] says. There won't be an Independent or 
Republican left living tomorrow in Hazlehurst. J. P. Matthews is 
certain to be killed.' I replied to him, "Oh, I just think they are 
trying to intimidate us. I don't apprehend anything of the kind. 
There has been an armed mob all day in Hazlehurst, but we are going 
to vote tomorrow anyway." "Well," he says, "you see I am not often 
fooled, and as soon as I heard his speech I took a train to go to Utica 
to vote against it. / am not any such Democrat as that to endorse any 
such speech or to instigate the people to such crimes at that." 

On Thursday, at Jackson, I met Mr. Dodds [who, with Sexton, 
was representing the defense before the committee] in the dining 
room, and he and my brother sat down there and talked. I said, 
"George, I have not been able to get to Hazlehurst and I had a very 
narrow escape to save my life, but I want to know the particulars 
about the murder of Mr. Matthews." "Well," he says, "Wheeler 
came to me and talked to me about his case, related the circumstances 
of the death and all, and just between us here, it was one of the most 
deliberate and cold-blooded murders I have ever heard of. I told 
him after he had related the facts to me that there was more room 
for him in Texas [what a pity that "Captain" Joe ever found room 
here to disgrace our state] than in Copiah County." 

Mr. Matthews, speaking from my standpoint and what I know 
of him, was one of the most generous and charitable and order-loving 
men in the world. He was a great man to keep within the law, and 
as evidence of that, he has been in public life there in Copiah County 
all of his life, and there has never been a charge against him of dis- 
honorable conduct; there has never been a record in the court against 
him for any crime, and he is the only sherifif, going back as far as I 
have had any knowledge of politics, to 1868, he is the only sherifif 
who has ever passed out of that office with a clear, clean record. 

In his home he was one of the kindest men to his family that I 
ever saw. His house, you might say, was just a regular hotel. I was 
there a month with him and I know I did not stay there a day unless 
they had company, men from the country who stopped with them. 
I do not believe he had an enemy. I never heard a man say he had 
anything against him, except his politics, that is all they would say. 
Socially he was the finest man anvwhere. 

The relations between Ras. Wheeler and Mr. Matthews were of 
the most friendly nature, and I speak not from what Mr. Matthews 
said, but from what Mr. Wheeler, himself, said. Wheeler, at Mr. 
Matthews' store, was talking to me, and he told me, "Burnet, I want 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 57 

you and Print to use your influence for me. I am a candidate for 
mayor. You know that Matthews has big influence here and 1 think 
he ought to give it to me because he and 1 have been the best of 
friends. I had rather vote for him than any man now that is running 
for office [Mr. Matthews himself was not a candidate, however], 
from the simple fact that I never went to him to get an accommoda- 
tion in my life that I did not get it." 

In this last election Mr. Matthews was unusually quiet. This 
time he told me that he had had many hard times in politics and he 
had concluded to quit and he was very glad that we had left him out. 

In regard to his character for peace and quiet, I may say that 
when these men were perpetrating all these outrages, I publicly 
spoke it out on the street that it was the act of dastardly cowards; 
that men who would go and drive a poor, defenseless man from a 
sleeping wife and murder him and then shoot her and go around 
and drive women and children out into the woods at night, were 
assassins and I didn't care what party got it up or who they were. 
Mr. Matthews told me, "Amos, you speak out too plainly. That is 
all true that these men who do these things are all cowards; but you 
are endangering the lives of all of us in talking that way. So far as 
I am individually concerned, they may kill me, but I don't want 
them to murder my wife and children." 

[On Cross-examination.] 

The difficulty with Hart occurred near the hotel. I was going 
to my office or place of business and I saw Mr. Hart with several 
others standing on the corner of the street. As I was passing between 
Mr. Hart and Mr. Bailey, Mr. Hart remarked, "I understand you 
say that you didn't make sport of Mr. Bailey." I told him I did not 
and could prove that I did not. "Well," he says, "you are a damned 
liar," and commenced to draw his pistol. I snatched my knife and 
struck at him and as he ran I struck him right on the shoulder, and 
I wished afterwards I had been closer to kill him and I would not 
have been shot, for I suffered a good deal. I was trying to get away 
from there. I knew my life was in danger. I knew any way I went 
I would be killed, and they ["Captain" Joe among them] left me 
for dead. There is a newspaper man here now who wrote up my 
obituary. 

I have got the names of those who were included in the affidavits 
upon which warrants were to be issued for their arrest — E. B. 
Wheeler, J. W. Bailey [Wheeler, "Captain" Joe and Charley Hart 
always seem to be in the same crowd], J. W. Purcer, Ruben Morris, 
Charles Hart, J. F. Thomson, Marion McCree, Joel East, Frank 
Davis, Emmitt Spencer, J. B. Middleton, and the man named Hig- 
don; those are the ones, and J. F. Wood, T. E. Matthews [brother 
of J. P. Matthews, who was assassinated], and H. H. Barlow made 
the affidavits. 

[Referring to the visit of Sheriff Hargrave and Mr. Meade to 



58 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

the home of J. P. Matthews on Saturday night after the warrants 
had been issued for "Captain" Joe Bailey, et al, the witness con- 
tinued] : Mr. Matthews said to Captain Hargrave, "I have been 
informed not more than half an hour ago that there was going to be 
just such a thing as that gotten up to have me killed. It looks as 
though there was something in it that it is a conspiracy to have me 
murdered." 

By a mob, I mean men in arms in violation of law, going and 
intruding on men in their private homes and disturbing the peace 
and enjoyment of their homes, and killing people. 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 59 



ANTIDOTES FOR BAILEYISM. 



I despise those public men who think they must remain poor in 
order to be considered honest. — J. IF. Bailey in I gob. 

The lust of avarice has so totally seized upon mankind that their 
wealth seems rather to possess them, than they to possess their wealth. 
—Fliny. 

How quickly nature falls into revolt when gold becomes her 
object. — Shakespeare. 

As objects close to the eye shut out larger objects on the horizon, 
so man sometimes covers up the entire disc of eternity with a dollar, 
and quenches transcendent glories with a little shining dust. — E. H. 
Chap in. 

Innocence is calm; guilt is boisterous and cries aloud in the hour 
of its discomfiture. — The Author. 

Avarice increases with the increasing pile of gold. — Juvenal. 

The lust of gold, unfeeling and remorseless, the last corruption 
of degenerate man. — Johnson. 

Avarice is generally the last passion of those lives of which the 
first part has been squandered in pleasure, and the second devoted to 
ambition. — Johnson. 

Whatsoever a man soweth, that also shall he reap. — The Scrip- 
tures. 

The avaricious man is like the barren sandy ground of the desert, 
which sucks in all the rain and dew with greediness, but yields no 
fruitful herbs or plants for the benefit of others. — Zeno. 

O cursed lust of gold! when for thy sake the fool throws up his 
interest in both worlds, first starved in this, then damned in that to 
come. — Blair. 

There is a law of forces which hinders bodies from sinking be- 
yond a certain depth in the sea; but in the ocean of baseness the 
deeper we get the easier the sinking. — J. R. Lowell. 

Real men let their work, not their words, speak out, and, if 
reviled, revile not again. — The Author. 

He who will not give some portion of his ease, his blood, his 
wealth for others' good, is a poor, frozen churl. — Joanna Baillic. 



60 Senator J. W. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

The mind of the bigot is like the pupil of the eye; the more light 
you pour upon it, the more it will contract. — 0. IV. Holmes. 

Bigotry has no head, and cannot think; no heart, and cannot feel. 
When she moves, it is wrath; when she pauses it is amidst ruin; her 
prayers are curses — her God is a demon — her communion is death.— 
O'Connell. 

Gentlemen indulge not in the vernacular or billingsgate of the 
bully or the blackguard. — The Author. 

The bigot for the most part clings to opinions adopted without 
investigation, and defended without argument, while he is intolerant 
of the opinions of others. — Buck. 

There never was any party, faction, sect, or cabal whatsoever, in 
which the most ignorant were not the most violent. — Pope. 

A brave man is sometimes a desperado; but a bully is always a 
coward. — Haliburton. 

He that ruleth his tongue is greater than he that taketh a city. — 
The Scriptures. 

It is with narrow souled people as with narrow necked bottles — 
the less they have in them, the more noise they make in pouring it 
out. — Pope. 

They that are loudest in their threats are the weakest in the execu- 
tion of them. — Colton. 

Where boasting ends, there dignity begins. — Young. 

The private citizen or public servant who masters not himself, 
unlike Alexander, has unconquered worlds yet before him. — The 
Author. 

There is this benefit in brag, that the speaker is unconsciously 
expressing his own ideal. Humor him by all means; draw it all 
out, and hold him to it. — Emerson. 

Where there is much pretension, much has been borrowed; nature 
never pretends. — Lavater. 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 61 



CHAPTER V. 
WHY BAILEY LEFT MISSISSIPPI (Continued). 

A. W. Burnet 

was recalled, and testified in substance, pages 620 to 636, as follows: 
The witnesses that have been called here to New Orleans by the 
defense and discharged without being called to testify, and who 
were members of that mounted, armed mob, before the election, 
that I have seen here, are Bill Higdon, Marion Higdon, Joe Purser 
and J. IV. Bailey; I do not know whether he was summoned or not. 
[A Mississippian recently wrote the author that the defense did not 
put Bailey on the stand because he was so "wild, woolly" and rad- 
ical that they could not handle him.] Ras. Wheeler has been here, 
too; I merely got a glimpse of him down on the street. I think 
Wheeler was registered at Fred's [but the Democratic minority of 
the Committee evidently did not think it wise to put either "Captain" 
Joe or "Major" Wheeler on the stand]. 

[The witness identified and testified to the truth of an interview 
of his, published in Washington, December 29, 1883, from which 
the following excerpts are taken] : "There had been an absolute 
reign of terror in some parts of Copiah County for some time before 
the election. The mob which came into Hazlehurst to kill Matthews 
had been riding through Beat 3 for a week. Warrants were issued 
for the arrest of those men and given to Sheriff Hargrave to serve, 
but he has never served or returned them. Warrants were issued 
for J. W. Bailey, Ruben Morrison, |oe Purser, E. B. Wheeler, the 
butcher, Emmett Spencer, T. F. Wolfe, the latter was a lounger 
around town, having no particular business, but picking up odd 
jobs, and a good many others. 

"When they reached the town they paraded the principal streets, 
yelling and flourishing shotguns and shooting pistols to the terror 
of women and children. After hearing a speech in the afternoon, 
the. order was given to mount and they marched back to Matthews' 
house, and first one and then another shouted, "Somebody had better 
get away from here." A couple of hundred yards from his resi- 
dence and directly in front of his store, they stopped and passed the 
following resolution: "Resolved, that J. P. Matthews leave the 
town of Hazlehurst, for forty-eight hours, and if his daughter is 
too sick for him to leave home, then, in that case, he must not be 
seen on the streets of Hazlehurst tomorrow, must not electioneer, 
and WHS/ not vote." Mr. Matthews sent back word by the messenger, 
McLemore, that he expected to stay with his family and to vote, 
unless he was murdered. E. B. Wheeler then gave the order, "File 



62 Senator J. W . Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

left, march." They marched out of Hazlehurst to the west about a 
mile. Then they halted and a vote was taken as to who should kill 
Print Matthews. The lot fell to E. B. fV heeler. I know they voted 
on that subject — / know it from several people, and from Wheeler's 
own words. Wheeler and a friend of his were reading a newspaper 
account of the murder of Matthews, which alleged an old grudge 
between the two as the cause. "That is not true, is it Ras.?" asked 
the friend. "It is all a d — d lie," said Wheeler. "There was no 
grudge between us. // fell to me to do it, that is all." Wheeler 
never made any excuse for the shooting. I can give you the story 
in his own words. He says when Matthews came into the polling 
place, that morning, he, Matthews, said to Wheeler, "Well, good 
morning, Ras., what do you know?" Wheeler said he knew nothing, 
and then he asked him, "Print, are you going to vote?" Print said, 
"Yes," and Wheeler said, "Print, I would not vote." Print smiled 
and replied, "I prize my right to vote very highly and feel that I 
owe it to my country." Then he stepped up to the ballot box and 
gave Inspector Coxwell his ticket. "I then took the shotgun," said 
Wheeler, "which was concealed in a dry goods box, and cocking 
both barrels, leveled it on him. Just as I pulled the trigger, he 
threw his eyes on me and put his hand to his side. He had no pistol 
in his hand, so far as I saw." That is JVheeler's own account of the 
affair. He has told it to at least a dozen men. One of them said to 
him after he had heard it: "Ras., there is more room for you in Texas 
than there is in Copiah." [What a pity that "Captain" Joe ever 
found room in Texas to drag down her southern ideals of states- 
manship and of devotion to the highest conceptions of duty on the 
part of her public men.] I do not want to give you the names of the 
men who told me, for / do not want to imperil their lives. They are 
still there. JVhenever there is a grand jury which is not made up of 
that very mob, I will give you the names of those very men, but it 
would not do now. 

"Some weeks before the election I went to Jackson and succeeded 
in getting an intelligent white commissioner of elections appointed 
for our side, instead of the ignorant negro that the Bourbons had 
bought up and wanted appointed. I got home late at night and went 
to bed. The next mornng a friend of mine came to my room and told 
me that J. IF. Bailey was looking for me to slap my jaws. I prepared 
myself for him and went out. When I met him I asked him if he had 
said any such thing, and told him if he tried it one of us had to die. 
He denied having said any such thing, but said that he understood 
I had been making remarks about him and made sport of him. I 
told him I had not done so; and he said it was all right, we would 
be friends, and he shook hands with me. A couple of hours after- 
wards I was walking down the street, and Bailey, Meade, and four 
or five others were talking together on a corner. As I came up to 
them they separated, and all went away but Bailey and a fellow 
named Hart, who stood so that I had to pass between them. Hart 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 63 

said to me as I came up: *I understand you say you didn't make 
sport of Bailey.' I said I didn't. He began to draw his pistol and 
said, 'Well, you're a liar.' I struck at him with my knife and he 
ran away. His pistol caught in his pocket. When he got thirty yards 
away he fired, and the ball went straight through my body. That 
was how I got my wound." 

On Monday night after Barksdale's speech, J. W. Bailey was 
called on for a speech. He said: "I have been in the saddle six days 
and I am not fit for speaking. I will now make a motion that we 
appoint a committee to bury the dead Independent and Republican 
voters of Hazlehurst tomorrow." ["Captain" Joe's experience and 
pretentions as a political undertaker were of early origin and rank 
growth.] 

H. H. Hogg 

was sworn and testified in substance, as follows, pages 614 to 620: 

I reside in Hazlehurst, Copiah County. Am merchandizing. 
Up to four years ago I have always been a Democrat; since then, I 
have been voting an Independent ticket. On November 5th, the day 
before the election, I saw a body of mounted men in our town armed 
with double barrelled shotguns. I counted 124 as they passed my 
corner and I suppose there were about 75 guns. I first learned that 
the mob was coming into Hazlehurst from a couple of young ladies 
who came running into my house and asked if I had heard of any- 
body marching into Hazlehurst. I heard that evening that they had 
sent a note to Mr. J. P. Matthews that he must not vote and if he did, 
he would lay himself liable to be killed. 

Mr, Cas Rines was talking to Bob Middleton in my house a few 
nights before the election. He said they aimed to carry it [the elec- 
tion] by stuffing the ballot boxes if they could, and if not, to carry it 
by bulldozing. 

A lot of us had agreed to vote early and go out bird hunting. 
When Mr. Matthews was killed, I was within eight feet of the door. 
It was about the time for the polls to open and Mr. McGinnis met 
me about eight feet from the door where Mr. Matthews was killed 
inside of the door. [Question by Committee: It has been rumored 
that Jim McGinnis was going to testify that he was in the building 
when Matthews was shot, and that he saw Mr. Matthews raise his 
pistol against Ras. Wheeler?] Mr. McGinnis, when that gun fired, 
was shaking hands with me, and Frank Morrison walked to the door 
within eight feet of me to open the door of the polls so that McGinnis 
was not inside of the building. After the gun fired McGinnis 
jumped in back of the door and drew his pistol and said that the ball 
had opened and if he had any friends, let them come now and pro- 
tect him. Yes, sir; I think he knew what had happened when that 
gun went ofT. I think he knew from his actions. There was much 
excitement in Hazlehurst the day Mr. Matthews was killed; women 
and children running all over the streets hunting up their brothers 



64 Senator J. W. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

and children. The first man I saw that morning was Rube Morris 
[one of "Captain" Joe's friends for whose arrest a warrant was out]. 
He passed my house with a double barrelled shotgun in his hand. 

I have known J. P. Matthews seventeen or eighteen years; known 
him well. I was born in Alabama, and was in the Confederate Army. 
J . P. Matthews was as peaceable a man as I ever saw. As charitable 
or more so than anybody. So far as I know, Leon Matthews and the 
other brothers are peaceable, quiet, generous and open-hearted men. 

George E. Matthews 

was sworn and testified in substance, pages 391 to 394, as follows: 

Have resided at Hazlehurst, Copiah County, since 1869 or 1870. 
Am a native Mississippian and a brother of J. P. Matthews. The 
mob was composed of white men, Wheeler was major. There was 
Joe Bailey and Hans Penn, and Bob Penn, Rube Morrison, Joe 
Purser and Wheeler. On Monday this crowd came in and went 
down and fired the cannon and the report came in town that they 
were coming to our house, to Print's, my brother's, to bulldoze the 
family, and I went to Dr. Oatis and asked him to go and see Mr. 
Hargrave and the leaders and stop it. My wife had been sick for 
weeks. The doctor was attending her and my brothers' daughter 
also. 

W. W. Cook 

(a Democrat), pages 327 to 340, was sworn and testified in substance, 
as follows: 

I have lived near Hazlehurst fifty odd years. I have held dififer- 
ent offices for about fourteen years. Sheriff for six years; also held 
the position of Probate Clerk. I saw Mr. Hargrave go out to meet 
this crowd of armed men who came into Hazlehurst on Monday. I 
went up to town Monday morning. I had heard about this mob as 
they called it, perambulating about District 3, and general rumor 
gave some outrages perpetrated by them. I was not in town every 
day, and on Monday morning when I went up there, Mr. Hargrave 
came to me and said, I do not recollect his exact language, but the 
idea was this: "These men are coming in; will you go with me 
and meet them and talk to them? Do you think it would be a good 
idea to go out to meet them?" At once I agreed with him. I thought 
it would be a good idea for him to go and if he could get two or three 
steady old citizens to go it would be well. I told him I would go 
and asked him what time they were expected in, and he said I think, 
about two or three o'clock in the evening, but before I went home 
to get my horse he came and told me that they would be there about 
twelve o'clock. I did not have time to go home after my horse and 
I saw an old gentleman crossing the street that I looked upon as a 
good citizen, and he too thought it was a good idea to go out and 
meet and talk to them. In the meantime, I understood there were 
some sick ladies in the town. I did not suppose that there would 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 65 

be anybody killed or damaged, but the idea was to caution them 
against that. Mr. Higdon [Sr.] was the man I spoke to about going 
out, and he told me that he understood Miss Matthews was quite 
sick and said, "I will go and see Dr. Pitts and ascertain the fact." 
He came back and told me the Doctor said she was very unwell. 
[Remember this witness is a strong Democrat, but evidently a law- 
abiding citizen]. We got a hack and started out and I suppose when 
about two miles we met them. My talk to them was somewhat thus: 
"Gentlemen, I do not suppose you propose to kill anybody; but there 
are some sick ladies in town and in your passing around, have respect 
for them." They asked me who they were, and I told them who. 
When I first mentioned Miss Matthews, there was some little mur- 
muring about it [remember the affidavits and the warrants], and I 
told them, "Gentlemen, there is this request we have got to make; if 
you have a notion to pass Mr. Matthews' dwelling, just say to your- 
self there is a sick lady in that house and show the respect she is 
entitled to." They told me they would do it [but they didn't]. That 
is the amount of it; the idea was to caution them against any violence 
or outrage. Mr. Hargrave made similar representations to them. 
He was present when I was speaking. He agreed with me. / sup- 
pose he knew what they were going in for [to murder Matthews], 
but I didn't. 

As a rule, our people are quiet and law-abiding. Of course there 
are exceptions. Our elections, as a rule, are free from turbulence and 
violence. It was so in the three elections that I was in. At the last 
election there was no Republican ticket. I think it was an Independ- 
ent ticket composed of Democrats, except as to one, Mr. Leon 
Matthews, he was a candidate for sheriff. 

My first knowledge of this political company marching through 
the county was to the efifect that they turned out night and day elec- 
tioneering and had a cannon firing it around. Then I heard all kinds 
of stories after that. I think whoever killed Tom IVallis and his wife 
ought to have been pursued, arrested and brought to trial. I did not 
believe the stories I had heard of the outrages at the time, because I 
did not think any man whom I knew in that country would be guilty 
of the outrages I had heard were perpetrated. My object was if the 
boys were determined to go into town, to ask them in passing houses 
where sick persons were, to show them respect. 

I cannot recollect many of the names of those that were in the 
Company. I do recollect some : Ras. Wheeler, W. W. Womock, one 
Higdon and perhaps two, Mr. Spencer, Jes. Thompson, Jr., I think 
Joe Bailey was with them [other witnesses said positively that he 
was] as were also Joe Purser, Mr. Hart, Ruben Morris, Bill Hig- 
don, Henry Spencer, J. F. Thomnson, and perhaps Marion Higdon, 
Emmett Spencer, and C. J. Allen [just that old crowd for whose 
arrest warrants were out'\. I would say there were 75 to 100 or 
maybe not more than 50. There was a good smart crowd of them. 
There were some men in that crowd that I do not think would be 



66 Senator J. W. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

recognized generally as the best citizens; some wild young men; men 
that I do not consider our best citizens. Many excitable and drink- 
ing men. I heard of their doing things that I did not think was in 
keeping with the law. In some respects, I do not think the Demo- 
cratic party pursued the right policy in electioneering in our county 
last fall. I understood before I went out to meet the crowd that they 
were doing things that I considered in violation of law, and they were 
not, therefore, law-abiding citizens when they violated the law. 
[This from a Democrat, and an ex-sherififl] 

All of the candidates on the Independent ticket last fall were 
respectable men. I said that, as individuals, I considered them so, 
that is respectable. 

J. L. Meade 

was sworn and testified in substance, pages 550 to 5c;7, as follows: 

[Meade was Chairman of the Copiah County Democratic Execu- 
tive Committee, and a participant in many of these transactions.] 

Have resided in Copiah County since 1880. Am a lawyer by 
profession. Was chairman of the Executive Committee of the 
Democratic party at the last election and as such I did not encour- 
age lawlessness or violence during the campaign. 

On the day before the election it was understood that there would 
be a crowd in town that day. I told the city marshal that there was 
no danger in my judgment of their disturbing his sick wife or the 
wife of Mr. Ed Matthews. I went up to the store, however, and 
after some talk with them [the Matthews] told them what I had 
heard and told them that if anyone undertook to interfere with their 
families that day, that I would assist in protecting them; that I would 
take sides with them and do what I could in protecting them. I 
pledged him my word that a gun should not be fired by the crowd 
on the east side of the railroad. Mr. Matthews thanked me appar- 
ently with some gratitude. 

Mr. Bailey made a speech after Mr. Matthews was killed. As 
to whether or not he was murdered, I am not called upon to try that 
case. Mr. Hart and Mr. Bailey were in the crowd that came into 
town on Monday before the election in line, two and two. He 
[Bailey] was in that crowd. I think they held a meeting in town. 
They went ofif by themselves when I came up. I do not know why 
they were coming [to town], but having heard it, to carry out my 
promise and assure myself, I went to see and did what I stated. 

When they [the mob] came nearer, inside of the corporation, 
the members of the band went out. I went with the band and as it 
started in town again I was at the head of the band for the purpose, 
and leaned over and whispered to the leader as I turned the corner 
for him to turn too, and I was satisfied that the procession would 
follow, too, in that way. I turned them around and brought them 
up to the courthouse again [this would indicate that the mob intended, 
originally, to go direct to Matthews' house and murder him, for some 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 67 

of the witnesses testified that members of the mob were cursing each 
other for their cowardice in not carrying out their plans. Mr. Meade 
"turned them around and brought them up to the courthouse again." 
Another witness testified that they went around behind the court- 
house and were much agitated about those affidavits. It will be 
remembered that Meade got up and left them caucusing behind the 
courthouse, because they insisted on sending the resolution to 
Matthews that he should not vote, to which he, Meade, was opposed.] 

T. J. Hargrave 

the Democratic Sheriff, was sworn and testified in substance, pages 
564 to 575, as follows: 

I reside at Hazlehurst. Was first elected Sheriff November, 
1881; re-elected for two years at the November election in 1883. 
To take our people as a whole, I think they will compare favorably 
with the people of any other county in the state as peaceable and 
law-abiding citizens. There ivas a warrant placed in my hands by 
the mayor of Hazlehurst for the arrest of some twenty-five men on 
Saturday night before the election, at about nine o'clock. On Sun- 
day morning there were several of the parties against whom the war- 
rants were issued who came into Hazlehurst and I arrested them and 
on Monday morning I gave the warrant to my deputy and he started 
on to Beat 3 to arrest the remainder of the parties named in the war- 
rant, and he executed it on all except probably three, as they were 
coming into town on Monday. He just took their personal recogni- 
zance to appear on Wednesday. They [afterwards] came to me in 
Hazlehurst and said they had been arrested and demanded a trial 
["Captain" Joe demanded a trial also of the Twenty-Seventh Legis- 
lature of Texas, in 1901, because he "had things fixed," but during 
the Thirtieth Legislature, of 1907, he strenuously opposed "a trial," 
because his "fixings" were not in such good trim]. I told them that 
Mr. Williamson was the man to try them, if at all. I did not fail to 
execute my office so far as the arrest is concerned, but I do not say 
that it is not true so far as their appearing before the mayor is con- 
cerned. I do not know whether they appeared before him or not. 
Mr. Williamson told me afterwards I need not bother any further 
with it and just let it go [Mr. Williamson's testimony shows that he 
was willing enough to administer the law, but this mob was too threat- 
ening, and the matter in effect had to be dropped. In other words, 
"Captain" Joe and his associate bulldozers intimidated the officers 
just as Coal Oil Joe twenty-four years afterwards intimidated the 
suppressors of truth in the Thirtieth Legislature of Texas in 1907-] 
I know my duty when there is a disturbance of the public peace, 
and that I have the power to call on a posse comitatus to help me 
restore the peace, to put down a mob and protect the lives of citizens 
and their property but my recollection is I did not hear anything 
of the mob and its operations until Saturday before the election [all 
the other witnesses heard of it for ten days or two weeks. 'Captain 



68 Se}iator J. W. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

Joe had the sheriff scared, evidently]. Mr. Matthews came to me 
with a list [petition] of names of 75 men [this was the petition to 
the sherifif] and as a result of that interview, a warrant was made 
out against about twenty-five men. Mr. Matthews told me that there 
was a mob down in Beat 3 riding around and creating a disturbance. 
I think I arrested three on Sunday morning. // they were armed, 
they had their arms concealed. They were in Hazlehurst on the 
street and I did not ask them what they were doing, nor do I remem- 
ber to have asked them if they had been riding around raiding. I 
took their personal recognizance for them to appear. No, sir; not 
in writing. I do not know where they went, nor whether they went 
back about their same business again, and I did not ask them nor do 
I remember to have told them that they must not. The men I arrested 
were Mr. Wolfe, Mr. Purser, Mr. Morrison I think, or Mr. Bailey 
[other witnesses said "Captain" Joe was in town Sunday morning, 
and then went out to the country "to quell the mob"]. My deputy 
arrested all the others that were arrested, all but two or three or four, 
probably. He did not bring them before me. They were coming 
to Hazlehurst and most of them were arrested. They were mounted. 
I do not know whether or not they continued in the ranks. Some of 
them came into Hazlehurst in that Company of mounted men and 
I saw them there. I do not know whether or not they were under 
arrest while their guns were on their shoulders and they were on 
horse back. I did not see my deputy. / went out to try to keep them 
from doing mischief in Hazlehurst. I selected Mr. Cook and Mr. 
Higdon, two good citizens of that town, and went out and met those 
gentlemen [what a soft name for brigands, murderers and assassins] 
about two miles from Hazlehurst and told them I had come out 
there at the request of Mr. Matthews and asked them not to disturb 
him or any one else in Hazlehurst that day and they promised they 
would not. [Has "Captain" Joe ever kept his promises?] I think 
some of the men told me when I met them that they had been arrested 
that morning and released on a recognizance. Knowing that there 
was an armed mob scouring the country and deliberately riding into 
town, and making a demonstration which was offensive in appear- 
ance — you begged that mob not to commit any harm on Mr. 
Matthews and his family, though the deputy under the law had 
already arrested these same mounted villains and let them go on their 
recognizance? Yes, sir; I suppose that is the law in Mississippi. 
And having arrested through this deputy twenty-five mounted armed 
men, who by that time you had learned had been going about this 
work out in the county, you allowed them still to remain in Hazle- 
hurst with their guns, these mounted men, and to march around 
there? — Yes, sir. I did not know they were sending resolutions to 
him not to vote. I heard it afterwards. I did not deputize some of 
the very men against whom the warrants had been issued to assist 
my deputy in making the arrests. I do not remember whether or not 
J. W. Bailey, on Sunday morning, in my presence, one of the men 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 69 

whose name was in the warrant, said that he was going out to help 
arrest those fellows. We had no difficulty in making the arrests. 
All we had to say to the fellow on horse back was, "I arrest you; I 
take your recognizance for $ioo to appear for trial." Mr. Matthews 
did not seem satisfied with my promise to arrest those parties if affida- 
vits were made against them, and the warrants placed in my hands. 
He remarked that he could take twenty men and go down there and 
and stop it. The affidavit was made sometime after night. The war- 
rant was placed in my hand about nine o'clock, and I tried to get 
several men to go. I was sick at the time, myself, and I told Mr. 
Matthews I could not go. On Monday most of these men came into 
Hazlehurst and wanted a trial ["Captain" Joe must have been in a 
hurry for his "exoneration"], and the mayor refused to try them. All 
you did during the ten days preceding the election to keep the peace 
was to serve one warrant in which there were twenty or twenty-five 
names and that service was rendered absolutely nugatory so far as the 
work was concerned, by immediately releasing the men on recogni- 
zance — Yes, sir; that is about it. Yes, sir; I was re-elected at this 
last election. / ivas a candidate when the bulldozing was going on, 
if any went on, and I would not be surprised if it did. I never have 
made any return on the warrant at all. I have got it. It is not here; 
it is in Hazlehurst. / did not maize any legal arrest of them. They 
were there ready to be tried [and "exonerated" by an intimidated set 
of officers, willing enough, but afraid to do their duty]. 

George B. Hamilton 

sworn and examined, testified in substance, pages io8 to 112: 

I live in the town of Hazlehurst; have been there 25 years. Was 
one of the last election officers. My duty was to keep a report of the 
votes. I went to the voting place about half-past eight. Mr. J. P. 
Matthews came in after no great while. It was a house under re- 
pairs and lumber and shavings were all over it, and we had to clean 
it up and arrange it so as to have a place for a table to write on. 
There was perhaps a half dozen persons there, clerks, managers, 
inspectors and mybe one or two more. I saw Ras Wheeler and Mr. 
Matthews. He stood around and talked with them all. Wheeler 
was the last man I saw him talking to. About that time we were 
ready for business; the polls were opened. Mr. Matthews was in 
there and he says, "As I am here, I will vote before I go out." He 
tendered his vote and it was received, then he was shot down. I saw 
him fall. He had just voted and stepped back from the table and 
was standing right still. If he had any weapons, I did not see them 
until further along. I was facing him just like you [Senator Frye] 
are facing me now. I was fixing my papers, standing up at the time; 
had not taken my seat, and when Mr. Matthews handed his votein, 
and he stepped back, I was looking him in the face and was just 
going to sit down myself when he was shot. I went round and looked 
at him. He was lying there, smoke in the room. When the smoke 



70 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

cleared I saw Mr. Wheeler; he had a gun. I saw him unbreach it 
and take out the cartridges and reload it and then he went out. He 
was i8 feet from Mr. Matthews. 1 measured it myself with a square. 
Mr. Wheeler was standing there behind me. The shot entered Mr. 
Matthews' person somewhere about here (pointing to the breast). 
I did not see him any more until he was laid out. I went down to his 
house and saw him after he was laid out. He was [at one time] 
Democratic sheriff of the county. Mr. Matthews was appointed 
challenger for the Independents at the polling place, while he was 
in the house, before he was killed; he and Wheeler were the two 
challengers. If there was any bitter and angry talk between Wheeler 
and Matthews, I did not hear it. They had a little private talk sort 
of in that end of the house, while we were fixing the counter, and 
waiting for time to open the polls [from this and the testimony of 
other witnesses, it is evident that Wheeler and Matthews agreed that 
they should each act as challengers for their respective sides in this 
conversation they had. No doubt, this was a part of the scheme of 
assassination agreed upon by the leaders of the mob]. There was 
nothing about the conversation that attracted my attention. I saw 
nothing out of the way as to Mr. Print Matthews but what he was 
in good spirits. After he was shot down, there came in a man with 
a gun [McGinnis]. I reckon about the time that he was dead they 
burst the front door open and came to where he was lying and on the 
opposite side from me I saw a man stoop down [this was one McGin- 
nis, a member of the mob] and pick up a pistol right by his side, but 
I could not see that it was a pistol until he reached down and picked 
it up because it was on the opposite side from me; I saw him pick 
it up from right up close to the — touching him — I saw that myself. 
[The fact that this pistol was found under Matthews, either in his 
pocket or fallen out of his pocket, doubtless furnished the pretext of 
self-defense on which, as the author understands, Wheeler was after- 
wards granted bail, though murder was not a bailable ofYense under 
the law and then acquitted through perjury or political "pull." 
Thus was justice cheated and murder justified.] 

[On Cross-examination.] 

I generally vote for the man that suits me, for some Republicans 
and some Democrats or Independents, just as I please. I went up to 
the polls before they got ready and Mr. Wheeler said to me, "Will 
you act as clerk today?" I said, "Yes." Mr. Wheeler seemed to be 
managing around and getting up the clerks and starting the election 
ready for voting when the polls were opened. Mr. Matthews was 
the first man to vote. 

G. M. Bankston 

was sworn and testified in substance, pages 246 to 249, as follows: 

I live at Hazlehurst; was born and raised in Copiah County. I 
saw the armed and mounted men in town the day before the election, 
75 or 100. 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 71 

I was inspector at the Hazlehurst precinct. Represented the In- 
dependents as inspector. I have always voted a mixed ticket all my 
life; I have always voted for the man. I went to the polls between 
eight and nine o'clock. When the polls were declared open, and all 
were ordered out of the house, except the officers of election, Mr. 
Matthews remarked that he reckoned he had a right in there, as he 
was one of the challengers and Mr. Coxwell remarked, in a laughing 
way, "Yes, brother Matthews," or something to that efifect, "make 
yourself at home." Mr. Matthews stepped up and says, "I want to 
vote." Mr. Coxwell handed him a ticket, having sort of doubled 
it up to put it in the box, and he, Matthews, held it up with both 
hands, and said "That is right," and handed it back to Mr. Coxwell. 
I was running the poll book and while I was looking on the poll book 
there was a gun fired. I threw my eyes up in the direction of the gun, 
in the direction where Wheeler was standing, and he had a gun in 
his hand down and looked like he was reloading and unbreaching 
the gun. Then I threw my eyes on Matthews and when I first saw 
him he had his face towards Wheeler; in a short time he commenced 
staggering. I was on the opposite side of the counter. The box was 
on the top of the counter. I was about, three, four, or five feet from 
him and when I saw him stagger I thought I would go to him before 
he fell and catch him and I ran under the counter, and as I arose 
from under the counter, he fell before I could get to him. Matthews 
and JVheeler spoke friendly that morning. I heard no excitable talk, 
no indication that there was to be a tragedy. Twenty-four buck shot, 
I think, taken efifect. There was one hole right under the throat, and 
the other right across the nipples. I suppose there was a space of 
three inches between the two loads. 

I was in the Confederate army. After he fell on the floor, and I 
saw he was dead, there was none of his brothers there. Wheeler was 
standing at the side door when I went out and I never saw him any 
more that day. [The witness being recalled, pages 289 to 290, testi- 
fied as follows] : As he fell a pistol which was found after Print 
Matthews was shot fell out of his pocket and on the floor, right under 
his hip. 

L. O. Bridewell 

was sworn and testified in substance, as follows, pages 381 to 384: 

Reside at Beauregard, Copiah County, Mississippi. I am a law- 
yer. / have been a Democrat all my life up to the election of l88'i 
m Mississippi. I was in the Confederate Army; was a staff officer, 
tn General Hardee's staff . I knew Mr. Matthews intimately. I can 
express his character in three words : he was a man who had the cour- 
age of hts convictions. He was a very generous man. White men 
have told me that they would have been ruined if it had not been 
for the financial assistance of Mr. Matthews, while they were Demo- 
crats and he was a Republican. Yes, he did possess those qualities 
which are described by the word manly; beyond contradiction. 



72 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

George J. Mortimer 

a witness for the defense, testified (pages LXXXI to LXXXV) in 
substance as follows: 

I have lived at Crystal Springs [ten miles from Hazlehurst] ; for 
about twenty-five years. I am a Republican. A few irresponsible 
men have done all the wrong that has been done. Killings occur 
elsewhere all over the United States at elections, in cities and in the 
country. Yes, I voted with the conservative Democrats. That was 
a local election with no politics that I could see in it at all. 

W. W. GOWIN 

was called by the Democrats, and testified in substance, pages 6io to 
614, as follows: 

I am a practicing lawyer at Hazlehurst. I know E. B. Wheeler, 
who was appointed by the Commissioners of election as Democratic 
inspector of election at the East poll in Hazlehurst [the poll where 
Matthews was murdered] for the last election in that county. He 
did not serve as such because he was removed by the board or County 
Commissioners. The board, under the circumstances, regarded him 
as being an improper man for the place, when complaints were 
raised by the opposition ticket on account of the active part he had 
taken in that "procession" or whatever you may please to term it. 
He had been with them and they deemed that it would be detrimental 
to a free ballot at the precinct. For that reason I, as one member of 
the board, voted to remove him and fill his place by another which 
was done [this was the position of inspector. It seems the challengers 
were selected at the polls and not by the board of commissioners — 
hence Wheeler seems to have butted in to the latter position on the 
morning of the election, in order, doubtless, to carry out the work 
of assassination for which he had been selected "by vote or lot," on 
the part of the leaders of that mob, in order to get rid of Print 
Matthews, and the affidavits and warrants against Bailey et al]. As 
a commissioner of election I was, under the law of our State, a gen- 
eral conservator of the peace. As such, Mr. Matthews requested me 
to do what I could to see that general peace was preserved. I told 
him I would do so. He spoke of some sickness in his family and 
said that he did not want any disturbance there. I told him that I 
would use my best endeavors to prevent all of that. There was some- 
thing said that day about the canvassers in the western part of the 
county coming in and he expected them that day or in the evening. 
By "canvassers" I mean what is termed by some that mob from the 
western part of the county; some rumor or word had come in in the 
morning that they would be in there on that day. It was about twelve 
o'clock when I was talking to him. He sent for me just before they 
came in, I think, with a view to requesting me to use my influence 
as a conservator of the peace, as well as commissioner, to prevent any 
trouble. 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 73 

Leon H. Matthews 

a witness for the prosecution, testified (pages i to 19) in substance as 
follows : 

I am a brother of J. P. Matthews, familiarly known as "Print" 
Matthews, the man who was killed on election day at Hazlehurst. I 
am 32 years old ; have resided in Copiah County since my birth. My 
father has resided in Mississippi all his life. He is still living. I am 
merchandizing; a co-partner of Print Matthews. 

Just before the election they started out in armed mobs or bodies 
of men and ranged over the country and killed some and shot others 
and took some out and whipped them severely and put a rope around 
some ; they did not hang any of them until they were dead. Some two 
weeks before the election there was a body of them started from the 
lower end of Beat 3. I saw one after he was killed [Tom Wallis]. 
This same crowd, they whipped these four. That is the crowd that 
is said to have killed this other one and shot his wife. I do not recol- 
lect whether it was Friday or Saturday; I think he was killed Thurs- 
day night and he lay all day Friday and I think it was Saturday that 
I saw him. I did not see where she [Wallis' wife] was shot. I saw 
her sitting in the house and they showed me where the shot went in 
the top; went in the quilt that was hanging up. I looked in and saw 
the corpse; I saw where the bullets went in the door. 

When I saw the mob they were in Hazlehurst; they marched into 
Hazlehurst there and paraded the streets, and then they marched 
back through the town and around and came up by my brother's 
house, in front of his gate and marched down some three or four hun- 
dred yards to our store and in front of our store; they halted and held 
a consultation after a little while and sent a messenger up to my broth- 
ers,' house; they waited there until he came back; when he came 
back and reported to them, they consulted a little and got on their 
horses and went ofif. The message v\'as a warning to him not to vote. 

When Major Barksdale addressed tliis mob it had marched in 
from the country. It had been raiding over the country for some- 
time. They had a cannon all over the country firing. They went to 
my brother's store — I have a brother who has a store in the country — 
and they went to his house, a big body of them, and shot at his store 
and he in the house and there was several holes in it. They shot a 
cannon all around. They waited on my brother [the one who had the 
store in the country] the next morning with a lot of resolutions, which 
went on to say that if certain parties were injured in any way, in per- 
son or property, I think it read, if there was any injury done to them 
in person or property [that sounds like Joe and he was there the 
night before for they called on him for a speech] that they would 
hold the Matthews family personally responsible and nothing short 
of their blood would satisfy. ["Captain" Joe wanted things done 
"personally" then as he has wanted charges filed "personally" since.] 

The men who were in that mob were then owing us and they have 
run their property off under that deed of trust and I am going to 



74 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

have a warrant issued for their arrest for removing the property. 
The man who killed my brother, Ras Wheeler, has got an open 
account there unsettled. They were perfectly friendly; not two 
weeks before the election another brother and myself loaned him 
$200 to buy cattle with. A short while before the election he was at 
our house, at my brother's [the one who was killed] and took tea. 
There was nothing prior to the day of election to indicate ill feeling 
between my brother and Ras Wheeler, not a word that anybody ever 
knew of. He had solicited us. He was a candidate for mayor. Soon 
after the polls were opened my brother went in and presented his 
ticket to vote and they shot him and killed him; Wheeler did. Be- 
fore I got over to where he was killed, I met a squad of six or eight 
men with guns, but I did not pay much attention to them and think 
though the Wheelers were in the crowd. [Isn't it a pity that he didn't 
give the rest of the names, for "Captain" Joe was probably with his 
"Major" at this critical juncture?] On Monday evening they rode 
ofif and that night there was another wing of them came through town 
and went out in an easterly direction. The day of my brother's death 
they were in arms all day on the street. They fired a cannon soon 
after my brother was killed. 

I saw the resolutions that were handed to his [brother's] son 
[after the funeral]. There was only one man presented them, but 
he said that he did it as a voluntary act of his; that they had appointed 
a number of men to present those resolutions, but he asked them not 
to do it; told them that there was sickness at my brother's house and 
he would not like for a crowd of men to go there and he asked them 
that he might carry it himself quietly to the house. It might have 
been on the day of the return from the burial; I do not recollect 
about the time. 

J. P. Matthews left a widow and five children. They moved to 
Oxford, Mississippi, directly after he was killed. His sons were 
going to school at Oxford at the time he was killed, and I advised his 
wife to go there. 

It was said by all of them that they were going to carry the elec- 
tion and // they could not carry it one way, they would carry li 
another. [Sounds like Boss Bailey.] Some would say carry it by 
shotguns and I heard one speaker say they would carry it if they had 
to carry it to the extent of the knife. I do not know what he meant 
by that. I know of nothing that my brother had said or done calcu- 
lated to lead to this murder, nothing except that he had tried to get 
this sheriff and the people to stop it when they were raiding over the 
country; he went to the sheriff and tried to get him to stop it; he 
said he had no authority to do it. I believe the next evening, after 
they visited my brother's store [in the country] and shot into it, he 
came up to Hazlehurst, he and Dr. Barlow, and Dr. Barlow had a 
petition from a lot of citizens down there asking the sherifif to stop 
it that it was terrifying the country and he thought it was his duty 
to stop it. They went to the sherifif and he said he could not stop it 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 75 

unless they would make an affidavit. Well, my brother, T. E. 
Matthews and Dr. Barlow made an affidavit before the mayor for 
the arrest of these parties — parties that he knew, and carried it to 
the sheriff and he didn't know who he would get to serve it. But at 
any rate, he comes down to our house [Print Matthews and the wit- 
ness lived together] while we were at the supper table — the sheriff, 
Hargrave, and J. L. Meade, and they wanted to see Print; and 
directly he got through his supper he came out, and Hargrave told 
him that he had tried to get somebody to go out and make the arrests 
and had not got any one and that he would deputize him. Well, my 
brother said to him that he was informed not longer than half an 
hour ago that that was the program of Mr. Meade to have him depu- 
tized to go out and send a posse of men along with him and he was to 
be killed. He told Hargrave that it looked very strange; that it 
looked to us that it was a concocted plan between them to do this 
because we had been notified. A party had told my brother that 
he had overheard Mr. Meade say this. Mr. Meade did not deny it. 
It was the armed mob [of which Joe Bailey was "Captain"] that 
Hargrave wanted my brother to arrest, and of which Meade was a 
member. [This conversation occurred Saturday night, before the 
election on Tuesday, and "Captain" Joe Bailey was among the num- 
ber for whose arrest a warrant had issued.] 

Immediately after the shooting of my brother, this company shot 
the cannon across the bridge from our house [as the "Major" of the 
mob had just assassinated Matthews, it is highly probable that "Cap- 
tain" Joe, the ranking officer, was in command on the streets]. 

John Matthews 

a witness for the prosecution, testified (pages 19 to 26), in substance, 
as follows: 

I am a son of Mr. Print Matthews; will be 21 in June. Am liv- 
ing in Oxford, Mississippi, in college there with my brother, S. S. 
Matthews, and my mother and two sisters are living there. 

I was at Hazlehurst Saturday and Sunday before the election; I 
came from college down there. Was at my father's house. Left 
Sunday evening for Oxford. I was not there again until I was 
telegraphed for, after father was killed, arriving at one o'clock that 
night. 

When Dr. Barlow asked my father to go with him Saturday night 
with his petition of 60 men from Beat 3 to Hargrave, asking for pro- 
tection, he went and I went along with him. The petition was signed 
by 60 or 80 men asking for protection for the people. They asked 
Hargrave for protection and I believe told him that if he could not 
get anybody to go out there, if they would deputize these 60 men they 
would protect themselves if authorized to do it, and they would stop 
it. He said he could not do anything without affidavits were made 
and an hour or so passed in conversation there in the town and they 
went down to the drug-store; the mayor of the town was a druggist 



76 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

there also. In the meantime, my uncle came in from the country. 
He had a store out on his plantation and he brought some shot that 
he had picked up there that they had shot through his house there 
the night before, and he also brought a resolution that two men came 
back the next morning and handed him, and which applied to him- 
self and all the family — women and children. But Barlow and these 
other one or two men that came with him, also my uncle, 7nade out 
affidavits against what men they linew that were in the mob and Mr. 
Williamson placed them in the hands of the sherifif to be arrested. 
I do not know how many they made out warrants against, but they 
had several, a good many, all that they knew. I know that they made 
them out against — I heard them calling over the names — Frank 
Thompson, a fellow named Mitchell, and Mr. Bailey, and I don't 
know who else. I heard the names at the time, but 1 do not remember 
now. These warrants were given to the sherifif. I asked the mayor 
about them and he told me they were never served nor never returned 
to him. They were not returned served nor unserved. We were 
occupied there at the drug-store till about half past eight o'clock at 
night. We started to the house and we met a negro man and he 
called pa ofi and had a talk with him and as we walked on; pa said 
that he had just overheard a conversation of Mr. Meade and several 
others [the witness for the defense, Sexton, testified that Bailey had 
come into town out of Beat 3 at just about this hour] ; that they had 
fixed to appoint liim [Print Matthews^ to go out and arrest these 
men and would send other parties along that would fcill him before 
he got there; that he would never get bacJi alive. 

While we were sitting down to supper these men came to the 
gate, Mr. Hargrave, and his deputy, Air. Lowe, and Mr. Meade. 
Pa did not come out at first. I was out there when he came out. Mr. 
Hargrave told him that he had concluded to deputize him to go out 
and arrest this mob. Pa told him that not half an hour before that 
he had been informed of a plan that Mr. Meade and others had fixed 
upon to assassinate him. I think he told them that if they were go- 
ing to murder him, they might just as well come there and murder 
him as to get him ofif there and assassinate him. 

Hargrave and all disclaimed knowing anything about it, as a 
matter of course ; they went along out and the next morning was Sun- 
day morning; part of the mob came in town Saturday night [Sexton 
said Bailey did] and I suppose they were there Sunday morning; I 
know they went back for I saw many go back on horses and mules 
with their shotguns Sunday morning; some of the crowd I know 
that warrants had been issued for their arrest and placed in the sher- 
iff's hands the night before, and it was generally understood and I 
heard that he had deputized these men to go out after the others, the 
very men that affidavits had been made out against. The men against 
whom warrants had been made out Jiad been deputized by him to 
go and stop the others. 

The reason why I was there, I got a leave of absence from the 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 77 

college to attend the State Fair. One of the professors went with me 
and I wrote him that we would spend Sunday home. I had promised 
the chancellor to be back on Monday for recitation and pa insisted 
that I shouud go back on Sunday evening. I asked him to let me stay 
and he said no, he did not think there was going to be anything. He 
thought everything would go on smoothly; he didn't think they were 
trying to do anything, though he concluded to go with me to Jackson 
and see Mr. Lowry, the governor. The sheriff had refused to give 
assistance and he went to Jackson, so he told me, and applied to the 
governor for protection. I left him at Jackson and went on. I 
received a telegram Tuesday afterwards about 12 o'clock of the death 
of my father and I went down. At Crystal Springs [enroute from 
Oxford to Hazlehurst] Mr. Jordan, one of the Democratic bull- 
dozers, came in the car and took a seat by me. He is marshal of Crys- 
tal Springs. He told me that he had just come from Hazlehurst on 
the train that met there. That he had just come up to meet me and 
he broached the subject and commenced talking about the murder; 
that it was a great outrage and all this kind of thing, to start out on; 
and he asked me what I proposed to do about it. I told him that I 
did not know if I could do anything, but that every dog had his day 
sooner or later. [Joe's day of exposure has been long postponed.] 
About that time young Mayes and young Ware came in the car and 
told me they had come up to meet me and understood that Wheeler 
[the assassin]. Hart [he who shot Burnett for denying that he "made 
sport of Bailey"], Bailey, and the crowd were to meet my brother 
and myself at the train and have a fuss and probably liill us, and that 
they had come up on the train. We got to Hazlehurst and the wife 
of Dr. Wheat, one of the professors of Greek at the University, came 
down with us and my brother was with her and I was with these 
two young men and we passed through the crowd. My father was 
killed Tuesday and on Wednesday they had speaking. ["Captain" 
Joe Bailey was the sole orator on behalf of the adoption of the reso- 
lutions.] I don't think it was in the court house. I think it was in 
the street. I know it was not in the court house, because I could hear 
the speaking distinctly from that house, that is, his voice and the 
hallooing and yelling, and everything of that kind, the shooting of 
cannons, the playing of the band, and the marching around. I was 
not there ; I do not know what they did, only what was handed me. 

They didn't bury the corpse until Thursday; it was impossible 
to get the vault finished, and the workmen were afraid to work at 
night; they just worked in the daytime. Tuesday and Wednesday 
and Wednesday night nearly everybody was going all over the street 
all day and all night with their guns. You could see them at any 
time of night or day that you wanted to. I heard they kept the roads 
guarded, but I do not know how true that is, and turned back a good 
many of our friends who wanted to come in; but there were many 
of them came through the woods, though, and slipped in. Just as 
I stepped out of the carriage on returning from the burial and before 



78 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

they [the family] had all returned, a man named Jehu Butler walked 
up to the fence and called me out and went on to say that he hoped I 
would not think hard of him for what he had done, etc. He had 
these resolutions in his hand and said they were sent there; he told 
them that he was on good terms with the family and that he would 
volunteer to bring them the next day after the burial if they would 
do that and he handed them to me as soon as I returned from the 
burial. I stayed there about a week, and day and night this same 
thing, shotguns all over town, night and day, and they were there 
when I left. 

/ saw the organized company of men go out with shotguns Sun- 
Jay morning. They were not in town Saturday. They went out 
three or four at a time. Maybe you would see one go and in a minute 
another go, and directly six would go, just in that way. I know Ras. 
Wheeler, who killed my father. He is a cattleman. They were very 
friendly. I have seen him at the store. Before I left there, there was 
never a day scarcely passed but what he would come around the store 
and talk for an hour or two. 

Mrs. Mary Matthews 

wife of deceased, was sworn and testified (pages 58 to 61), in sub- 
stance as follows : 

I now reside at Oxford, Mississippi, with my family. I left 
Hazlehurst, November 26th, without an expectation of ever return- 
ing. I did not expect any of my family to go back there to live, 
although our property is there. My husband had a good deal of 
real estate. I have been living in Hazlehurst 12 years. I was born 
and raised in Copiah County. All of my family were residents of 
Mississippi. My two oldest children were in college at Oxford. 

I saw this crowd of mounted and armed men around Hazlehurst 
at the time of the election. They passed my house. They were 
armed. They said, "Somebody had better get away; somebody was 
mighty sick," two or three times. They were hallooing. They 
stopped right at the bridge near the house. They traveled around 
the street until Major Barksdale went to speak and then they went 
up there and whooped and hollered and cut up. In the morning 
they came in firing; they said they had been riding all night. Yes, 
I know Mr. Wheeler; he had visited the house not a great while 
before that; had taken dinner or tea there one night. My husband 
and Mr. Wheeler were on good terms; they never had any difficulty. 
My husband was a peaceable, quiet man in the neighborhood. He 
was very quiet and peaceable at home and everywhere. We always 
had company. He had dealings with the Democrats just the same 
as with Republicans in his store. 

Yes, I saw this crowd of men on election day after my husband 
was killed. They were on the street and some of them at the gate 
and some of them in the yard, standing around. Thy told the negro 
that dug the vault that he would have to leave there; that they would 



The Political Life-Story of a fallen Idol 79 

kill him if he dug it. He fixed the vault and left and he has not lived 
there since. He has not come back. He did not quite finish it. We 
had that work done week before last. My husband took part in 
social life in Hazlehurst. He belonged to no church, but he would 
go to any church; he attended all of the churches, first one and then 
the other. He helped to support all of them, and helped to build. 
I never heard my husband endeavor to excite the hatred or angry 
feeling of any class of people against any other class, either in pol- 
itics or in any other way — he was not that kind of a man. 

J. W. BONDURANT 

was sworn and testified in substance, pages 94 to 103, as follows : 

I reside in Copiah County, Mississippi, Beat 3, where I have 
lived all my life. The first I knew of anything about the mob riding 
around was when Tom IVallis was killed. On Friday night before 
the election I was going from the gin and I met a lot of men in the 
road. There was going to be a speaking at Centennial that night, 
where I vote, and I thought I would go. / met those armed men 
and so I did not think I had any business there. They did not have 
the speaking there that night. There was a crowd came from Spen- 
cer's Mill, and met them and stopped at Ainesworth's store, which 
is about a mile and a half from where I live. 

Mr. T. E. Matthews and Mr. Matthews' clerk was there [near 
Matthews' store], and we stood there awhile and then walked up to 
the store, that is about 50 yards from the house. We walked in the 
store and made up a light. They were coming down [from Aines- 
worth's store to Matthews' store] right there below the store. They 
came up and hallooed around, "Somebody had better get away from 
here." Then they hauled the cannon around; we could hear it; 
and they said, "Turn it on the store," and one of them says, "Put a 
log chain in it and shoot the damned thing." One of them says, 
"Ain't you got buckshot; put them in and shoot hell out of them." 
[Perhaps "Captain" Joe, for another witness testified that they called 
on him for a speech.] I stood there on the gallery and Mr. T. E. 
Matthews stood there and they shot the cannon and hallooed and 
went on and cursed us and hallooed at us to go to hell, "the damned 
set of s — s-of-b — ." And then they rode on up the road and hallooed, 
"Halt." I was standing on the gallery and Mr. Matthews says come 
in and sit down, and I went in and sat down on one side of the fire- 
place, and Ormond was sitting behind me, and they rode up and shot 
their guns in the store and hallooed and made other noises and went 
down even with my house and hallooed again and turned and came 
back. Ras. Wheeler [he who was "Captain" Joe's, "my friend 
Wheeler," and in the opinion of the "Captain," "a noble electioneer"] 
says, "Open your mouths, you d — s — s-of-b — s, you," and about that 
time two pistols or guns fired and shot right in the store, and there was 
a continual firing. Some of the balls went in the side of the house, 
some passed through, and some went over our heads and struck some 



80 Senator J. W . Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

tinware, and two balls came in the door between Mr. T. E. Matthews 
and myself; we were standing about a foot apart. They hallooed, 
"Bring them out and swing them to a limb," and dared us to open 
our mouths and went on down the road about a half mile and made 
a negro come out from the house there and they went in tt. 

They went on down to the Thomson place and next morning 
came back, and passed some resolutions there about old Tom Wallis 
being killed, and they sent five or six men with their guns on their 
hips, with those resolutions. There was two negroes amongst them 
[Democratic negroes]. Among the men who came back with the 
resolutions were Charley Hart ["Captain" Joe's protector and de- 
fender against those who would "make sport" of the latter], and 
some others. 

I saw this mob next Sunday and Monday. I saw them on Sunday 
going down the Netches road. I was going on to Frank Bufkin's 
and as I got in the road some more of them went on down the road. 
They were on horseback, armed, and in two squads, about twenty in 
the last crowd. I could not see how many there were in the first 
squad. This was about fifteen or sixteen miles from the town of 
Hazlehurst. I did not see anything more of them on Sunday. I 
went on out to Frank Bufkin's and that was off the public road. I 
came back on Sunday night and Monday I started down to Hazle- 
hurst and I would see a few along every now and then until I got 
within six miles of Hazlehurst. Four of them came up and looked 
at me and put their shotguns that way (indicating). I did not know 
some of these men, but I did know Marion Higdon, to whom I spoke 
and says, "Marion, what does this mean; I thought we were good 
friends?" He was at the store that Friday night. I said, "For my 
part, if you had wanted me, you know I would have stepped out 
anywhere to talk to you. There is my sisters and my aunt and all her 
children there" [near the store]. I think there was fourteen of them, 
some of them nothing but children, screaming and hallooing, and 
I told him I didn't like it and I thought it ought to be stopped, and 
asked what he thought about it. They just remarked about it there 
in the mob that none of them was scared and they did not know any 
of their women were scared. Bailey says, "Bring Bondurant up here 
and we will make a Democrat of him." ["Captain" Joe began his 
assault on political "heathens and infidels" early in life.] I told him 
they tried that sufficiently the other night. That was all he said and 
I stopped at Jones' to get out of the mob, and when I stopped there, 
I got into it, just about as bad, because one rode in to get a shotgun 
and his mule would not let him take it and so he brought it back. 
Old Dr. Jones says to me, "Joseph, what does this mean?" I said, 
"I do not know, doctor, it looks like the country is coming to a pretty 
pass." It was Bill Higdon [one of those along with "Captain" Joe, 
for whose arrest a warrant had been issued Saturday night before 
this Monday] that rode with me. Bill says, "He [his father] told 
me to go ahead and carry Beat 3." He had a Navy Six about that 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 81 

long, and was trying to revolve it. I said, "I would not have thought 
that of you." He said, "By God, we are going to carry the elec- 
tion." I said, "Do you mean to say you are in favor of scaring help- 
less women and children?" He said, "No, but damned if we are not 
going to have this election." ["Captain" Joe must have imparted to 
Bill some of the former's enthusiasm as well as Democratic (?) pro- 
fanity.] When I went on I got up with them [the mob] when they 
were nearly to Hazlehurst. The head of the column was then about 
a quarter of a mile. [It will be remembered that "Captain" Joe left 
Hazlehurst Sunday morning, a warrant having been issued for his 
arrest Saturday night, for the express purpose of "quelling the mob," 
and now he returns triumphant at the head of the mob, as appears 
not only from this witness' testimony, but from that of another.] I 
attempted to ride on around, but they halted me and a fellow fired 
his pistol and he rode up and down and said, "Why in hell don't you 
shoot." Just as I got about middle ways they commenced shooting. 
Everyman pulled his pistol and commenced and they fired, I reckon, 
everything they had and then they halted again and I had to halt and 
stood there and Hargrave [the excuse for a sheriff] came out and 
met them. Just as we got into town one of the men rode down the 
line and says, "By God, I went into this thing to go through with it, 
and if I can get ten men to go with me, ive ivill wind matters up," 
and one of the mob said you can get just as many backers as you 
want. Frank Davis said he and Joe Purser gave that answer [war- 
rants were out for the arrest of both of these assistants of "Captain" 
Joe]. I went on and the first track I came to I went out and told 
Mr. Matthews [Print Matthews] what they said. Later on in the 
day I said to Marion Higdon, "Marion, I think this is a pretty pass; 
he is an old man and not doing anything; there is no use in killing 
anybody, and for God Almighty's sake, stop." He said, "Joe, I 
pledge you my word we are going to leave town." Then I asked 
Hargrave what is the matter, and he said, "That is all right, they are 
going to leave town now; I am going to do all I can"; but still he 
was not doing a thing, for I heard him inquiring about what was 
said when they passed Matthews. 

Barksdale made a speech that night in which he said, "Gentle- 
men, we shall carry the election regardless of issues." They called 
on Bailey for a speech. Bailey got up and made his excuse that they 
had been in the saddle [this was the Monday night before the assass- 
ination of Matthews the next morning]. I am not sure whether 
Bailey said that he had been in the saddle either a week, or three or 
four days. Then they called upon Ras. Wheeler and he got up and 
says, "I have been in the saddle." He said he was tired and worn 
out and had been in the saddle; that was their excuse, and, of course, 
everyone knew what they meant; and some of them said that every 
man must vote all the negroes they could; and Bailey got up and 
says, "They would not have none to vote, for they are all in the woods 
in Beat 3"; that was Bailey's words; and then he said he wanted to 



82 Senator J. W. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

make a move to appoint a committee to bury the Independent dead 
the next day. ["Independent dead the next day?" "Captain" Joe 
must have been thinking of the proposed assassination of Print 
Matthews by his "friend and noble electioneerer," Wheeler, who had 
been selected to commit the act by "vote or lot." Verily, "Captain" 
Joe, until recently the idol of Texas, began to propose the "burial" 
of his political enemies, and he always counts his political opponents 
his personal "enemies," very early in his public career. Oh, Texans, 
when will you arouse to the shame and disgrace that has darkened 
the hitherto untarnished history of our glorious commonwealth? 
When will you cease to bow down in shameful idolatry to this bigot 
and bully; this vain pretender? When, oh, Texans, will you rise 
again to that historic dignity and independence from which the state 
has recently fallen through the methods and the madness of this 
coarse and vulgar Standard Oil protege?] 

On election day I went up to Marion Higdon [at a voting box in 
the country] ; he was one of the inspectors. He came out and said, 
"I want to see you." I said, "What is the matter?" Marion said, 
"There has been a fuss and if you will keep these Independents away 
from here I will pledge you my word you will not be injured. The 
Independents are away ahead, and there is no need of any fuss at 
all." I said, "I do not want any fuss; I do not know anything about 
it. I just got here." He says, "I know it, but you send word to 
these men not to come back, and there will be no trouble, but they 
will get hurt if they come back." I said, "I have got nothing to do 
with them. I came here to distribute Independent tickets, and that 
I am going to do." I staid there awhile and began to inquire into 
the fuss. I looked up the road and saw Harman Bufifkin coming 
down the road and then came this crowd from Hazlehiirst behind 
him ["Captain" Joe was in command], and they galloped up and 
when I seen them coming, I struck a bee-line for Marion Higdon. 
I knew there was no chance to get away, for they were between me 
and my horse, and so I stepped up by the side of Marion Higdon. 
He looked at me and I stuck to him, and we never spoke a word to 
each other. He says, "Gentlemen, everything is quiet; you can't do 
nothing but feed your horses." One of them remarked,"^)' God, 
we are not going back without having something; we have got to 
have something before we go back." And one of them says, "Yes." 
One of them says, "Did you hear that Print Matthews is killed? By 
God, all we will have to do at elections now is just to meet and appoint 
our men and let them take their seats." [By the testimony of another 
witness there was twenty members of this particular crowd that came 
out from Hazlehurst; that "Captain" Joe was in command; that they 
were very much incensed when they found things quiet around the 
polls; that the Independents were ahead at this box about eighty- four 
votes, and that nearly all the votes had been cast; that when the box 
was turned in after "Captain" Joe and his men had officiated awhile, 
the Democrats were 84 ahead. And yet "Captain" Joe voluntarily 



The Political Life-Story of a Pollen Idol 



83 



told the Greenville people, October i, 1906, that he never stoic any 
ballots, and "would not let anybody else steal any ballots."] 

I got on my horse and started across to tell Darius Barlow. Some 
of them says, "We do not allow none of Matthews' friends to go in 
town ; we have got that thing guarded and none of them can go there. 
If any of them start from here, by God, we will get them before they 
get far, we will attend to that part of it down here." ["Captain" Joe 
was in command.] 

Ormand, whom the mob was after, was in Rankin County the last 
I heard and has not been back. Kin. Harrison went and told him 
that they were going to kill him; that the mob said they were going 
to report to the grand jury, and prove by four or five witnesses that 
he was the man that killed Tom Wallis and have him hung for it. 
[Is it possible that "Captain" Joe would lend himself to the murder 
of old Tom Wallis and then work up a perjury scheme to have an 
innocent man hung? Such is clearly the inference, and yet "Cap- 
tain" Joe says that the people of Texas need no proof except his own 
word concerning any matters in which he is interested.] 

My father was an Alabamian and a lieutenant in the Confederate 
army. He had been surveyor and assessor in Copiah County. I 
never knew a cleverer or better man than Print Matthews. He 
owned considerable real estate and furnished a good many members 
of this mob with provisions and supplies to make their crops. He 
was a liberal man and generous. You could find none more chari- 
table anywhere. 

[On Cross-examination.] 

Charley Hart, Judge Millsaps, Meade, Ras. Wheeler, Joe Bailey 
and Ernest Jones were some of the men who were present and heard 
Major Barksdale speak Monday night. // was just a crowd of that 
Hazlehurst mob. 




"Bailey goes a courting 

But Miss Texas smells the kerosene." 

• — From the Spokesman Review. 



84 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

CHAPTER VI. 
WHY BAILEY LEFT MISSISSIPPI (Continued). 

J. B. Allen 

was sworn and testified in part, pages 178 to 182, as follows: 

1 live in Beat 3, Tailholt precinct. Have lived there 1 1 years. 
Born in Tennessee. / was in the Confederate army. Was a Demo- 
crat up to 1877, and since then have been an Independent. Was a 
member of the Independent Committee this year. I have a brother 
who was secretary of the Democratic Committee. He sent me word 
by another brother that there was going to be trouble and he proposed 
that if I would withdraw from the opposition committee, he would 
withdraw as secretary from the Democratic Committee; that he did 
not want to be on opposite sides when there was going to be trouble 
in the county. The party that I had heard speak about shooting the 
first man if they got in trouble was a deserter in the Confederate 
army, and left me there to do the fighting, and I didn't think there 
was any danger in it, but I gave him a sound lecture on keeping such 
company. One of the mob came to my house, a brother-in-law of my 
wife. He called me out Saturday night the time they passed through 
that neighborhood, and requested me to go with them, that // would 
be best; they might burn my house or my gin and there was no tell- 
ing what they might do, and it would be safe and prudent for me to 
go and give my presence to the mob. My reply was that I would 
not give my presence to a mob of such a turn out as that. 

That was Saturday night, the night they shot Frank Hays and his 
wife. His leg was shot to pieces with buckshot and his wife was shot 
in the chin and through the neck and shoulder — four bullet holes 
besides where it struck her chin with one ball. / saw more guns 
and heard more guns fire in one week than I heard since I left the 
Confederate army in I <S6^. 

They rested Sunday until three or four o'clock in the evening. 
[Remember that "Captain" Joe left Hazlehurst Sunday morning to 
go out in the country to quell the mob of which he was Captain and 
lor all the ring leaders of which warrants of arrest were out.] I did 
not hear the artillery until I got back home late in the evening [Sun- 
day] and then I heard the cannon a good many times. NIen and 
women slept in the woods. I saw the bulldozers at Tailholt in force 
on election day, talking, hooting and making remarks to intimidate 
voters, and reading dispatches from certain places that so many 
negroes were killed and so many wounded — 700 killed and so many 
wounded at different places. [And yet "Captain" Joe has frequently 
told the people of Texas that he never told a lie.] 

I was a member of the Independent Executive Committee from 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 85 

that Beat and that committee did nothing in the world to stir up the 
negroes to strife. There was never a more ridiculous report ever cir- 
culated in Copiah County than the report that negroes were arming 
themselves or that Mr. Matthews encouraged such a thing. I had 
known him from boyhood. I heard him make the first and last 
speech he ever made. There was nothing in the world in those 
speeches to arouse the negroes. I started to go to the last meeting 
of the committee [Monday], but did not get there; my heart failed 
me or my courage or something. Well, I heard so many guns in 
front I did not know but what Grant's army might be in front. By 
the advice of a man that I thought had as much sand in his gizzard 
as I had and who said he thought it was not safe for me to go any 
further, I stopped. I did go, though, within a half mile of the firing, 
but concluded that I had no business at Hazlehurst. [This was the 
Monday morning that "Captain" Joe and his bulldozers were en 
route to Hazlehurst.] There is not a white man or black man in 
Copiah County that ever believed the rutiior that the negroes were 
rising against the whites. Not a white or black Democrat or Repub- 
lican, not a single one. No, sir; nobody believed it. Not a Democrat 
in the county believed it, not a single one. ["Captain" Joe evidently 
started that rumor himself to cover up his action by raising a false 
issue, just as he has done in Texas since.] I had a little piece of 
property there that cost me $5,000. I made it with my hard earned 
money; I made it with that hard fist (indicating). I am preparing 
to advertise it, and I have ofifered it for $2,500. If I could get rid 
of what I have, I would not live there half a minute. 

Noah Ramsey 

was sworn and testified in substance, pages 182 to 183, as follows: 

I live at Netches, Mississippi; was raised in Copiah County; am 
a Democrat. 

I know D. C. Woods; he was a candidate for Coroner and 
Ranger in Copiah County at the last election. He was going up to 
St. Louis and stopped over at Myles Station for supper the evening 
before the last election [Monday evening after the bulldozers had 
been in Hazlehurst that day and resolved that Print Matthews should 
not vote or die]. Mr. McNair, Major Sessions, and Chancellor 
McLaren, all Democrats, stopped ofi to get supper. After supper 
Mr. McLaren went into the store where Woods is clerk and we 
were speaking about the firing of the cannon throughout the county 
the day before, on Sunday, and he [Woods, the Ranger candidate] 
spoke, and said that Matthews would be killed, and that L. H. 
Matthews [Independent candidate for Sherifif] if elected would be 
killed. [Of course "Captain" Joe and his bulldozers would have 
to control the machinery of the court to keep from being prosecuted 
for their crimes.] This was the [evening of the] day before Mr. 
Matthews was killed. I saw the sons of Mr. Matthews as they came 
down from Oxford and they said they had received a telegram from 



86 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

their mother that their father was killed, and I told them I had 
heard the night before he was to be killed, but 1 did not believe it. 
I have known Mr. Matthews all my life. Have always found him 
to be a peaceable man, very charitable and sociable. 1 think he was 
quoted to be worth $35,000 to $50,000. 

B. F. GozA 

was sworn and testified in substance, pages 184 to 189, as follows: 

I reside in Beat 3, Copiah County. Have been there since Jan- 
uary, 1870. I was born and raised in Clairbourne County, adjoin- 
ing Copiah. / was too young to be in the Confederate army , but up 
to four or five years ago I was a Democrat; since then I have been 
an Independent. R. J. Allen and I went to the polls at Tailholt to 
vote. I had the ballot box. My brother and I concluded not to 
stay; then says Allen, "After seeing what I have, I cannot hold an 
election here. 1 have just seen 40 double barrel shotguns piled across 
the public road and I will not hold an election under the muzzle of 
shotguns. I cannot do it. Gentlemen, here are the tickets," he says, 
and we left. We went a half mile to a little storehouse, when we 
were overtaken by a messenger who tried to persuade Mr. Allen to 
come back and hold the election. Finally he made this proposition 
to Mr. Allen: "Allen, if they show any disposition to do right and 
the fair thing, you want that don't you?" He said, "Yes, I do. lam 
willing to hold an election if I was sure there was going to be no 
bloodshed, but I will not go there and hold it under the muzzles of 
shotguns." I said to the messenger, "If you will go back there, and 
their leaders will agree with some of our prominent men that they 
will appoint a committee — they may have the majority if they want 
it — to clear that crowd of arms they have and have them carried 
away. If this committee is strong enough to remove those arms from 
there and guarantee to Mr. Allen that they are removed he will go 
and hold the election." Mr. Allen said, "Yes, sir; I will go." In 
the meantime, some prominent Democrats rode up, among them Dr. 
Campbell. He said, "I will go with the messenger," and others 
spoke in the same way. "We will see if we can do it and try to get 
the thing adjusted," they said. They rode ofT and after awhile the 
messenger came back and said, "That is all right, it is fixed up and 
you can go now without any trouble." We started back and got 
within two or three hundred yards of the voting place and Dr. 
Campbell met us. We were on horseback. Dr. Campbell says, "I 
have come to meet you as friends and to say to you that I do not con- 
sider it safe for you to come there, and tell you as a friend I would not 
come there. It is one of the most shocking outrages I ever saw per- 
petrated." Dr. Campbell was a minister. To say that it was a reign 
of terror is, I think, putting it mildly. The rumor about the negroes 
coming armed was a fabricated thing {"Captain" Joe a fabricator^] 
it is perfectly ridiculous. If a few white men rode along the road 
firing into their houses with their pistols, they would be panic- 
stricken. 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 87 

Judge R. H. Ware 

was sworn and testified in substance, pages 189 to 196, as follows: 

I reside in Jackson, Mississippi. / was an officer in the Confed- 
erate army; was wounded there and lost a leg in the service. I am 
Assistant United States Attorney for the State of Mississippi. I 
spoke at Hazlehurst at the time Mr. Print Mathews made his speech, 
early in he canvass before the last election. There was nothing inflam- 
matory about the speech. It seems it was a severe arraignment of the 
Democratic party for their acts of violence and their disposition to 
stuff ballot boxes. There was nothing whatever that he said but 
what I think the evidence in the case thoroughly and completely 
justified. There was no appeal to the negroes whatever. Upon the 
contrary, the tendency and teachings of his speech seem to be just the 
reverse of that. About a week before the last election a courier from 
Copiah County brought a letter to me in my official capacity as 
Assistant United States Attorney. It was from Mr. Burnet, reciting 
the outrages that were being perpetrated there and saying that tJie 
election would be made a nullity without the acts of violence were* 
brought to a close in some way. Judge Lee, my superior, and I both 
examined the law as to whether or not the United States Government 
would have jurisdiction in a case of that sort. We differed some- 
what in reference to it. He thought, however, that the government 
had no jurisdiction in the case, being at a state election 

William P. Ware 

was sworn and testified in substance, pages 206 to 21 1, as follows: 

I reside in the village of Hazlehurst. Am merchandizing and a 
Democrat. / voted the Democratic ticket with the exception of 
one man on it, and that man I scratched. I will give my reasons for 
doing so. [No reasons would suit "Captain" Joe, for he wants the 
whole of the machine vote.] Owing to some resolutions that were 
passed by the club in Hazlehurst, the Democratic Club that was 
organized, I refused to join them. [This must have been early in 
the campaign. No other witness refers to these particular resolu- 
tions. They must have been vicious, as this Democrat would not 
stand for them.] 

I know Dr. Jones and had a conversation with him concerning 
this crowd of armed men who were coming to town Monday. Dr. 
Jones, I think, at perhaps eleven o'clock in the morning, came in 
the store and he seemed to be somewhat excited and said that he 
wanted to see me. I went into the back room and he told me that 
crowd — I do not remember whether he said they came in to kill 
Print Matthews or not — but he said that they had passed resolutions 
on the street somewhere to kill him. [Here is the later testimony of 
A. W. Burnett on this point : "They (the mob) marched out of Hazle- 
hurst (on Monday afternoon when Mr. Matthews had sent them 
word in response to their resolutions by McLemore that he would 



88 Senator J. W. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

vote unless they murdered him) to the west, about a mile. Then 
they halted and a vote was taken as to who should kill Print 
Matthews, the lot fell to E. B. Wheeler. I know it from several 
people and from Wheeler's own words.] Dr. Jones said they wanted 
him to go with them and he asked me as a friend of Mr. Matthews 
(which he knew I was, outside of politics; we were personal friends), 
he asked me to try and send Mr. Matthews word or see him in some 
way and let him know what was going on. According to Dr. Jones' 
request, I went to Mr. Matthews' store; he was not there and I called 
Mr. Leon Matthews and told him what Dr. Jones had said, and I 
told him I thought he had better leave. That was on Monday before 
the election. Dr. Jones told me there was a resolution passed some- 
where that that crowd that came in had passed a resolution to kill 
Print Mattheu-s that day. As I returned to my store I saw 30 or 40 
of the mob out in the street in the front of the store, and some of them 
remarked that they had backed down; "We knew that you would not 
do it after you had promised to do it." I think they were cursing 
each other somewhat for cowardice. They said that they knew that 
they would back out, and that they were a set of cowards; I believe 
those were the words. [This would indicate that the mob had in- 
tended to murder Matthews as they came in town that Monday 
morning with "Captain" Joe at their head. Of course, he had 
"quelled" them.] 

I told them [the ladies at the Matthews' home] I was satisfied 
that there were a great many Democrats that did not endorse that 
conduct; that matters had gotten into the hands of these rufifs [our 
"Captain" Joe a ruff? Surely his "enemies" must have been pursu- 
ing him even then], and it was impossible to control it, I thought. I 
told them I would find out why they had killed him and let them 
know; and some of Mr. Matthews' sisters requested me to let them 
know immediately. I went to the polls where Mr. Matthews was 
killed and I met Mr. Coxwell, and Mr. Hamilton, and Mr. Bank- 
ston, and other managers of the election, and they all said that they 
did not know anything about why Wheeler killed Matthews. They 
said that when they opened the polls Mr. Matthews turned and said, 
"Well, boys, I believe I will vote and go home; my wife (or my 
daughter) is sick and these people requested me not to stay on the 
street," or something of that kind. And he took the ticket in this 
way (indicating) and folded it and handed it to Mr. Coxwell with 
both hands, and Mr. Coxwell said just as he presented the ticket the 
gun fired and the doors were closed. Just as they were making that 
statement, there was a crowd of boys (I do not consider them Demo- 
crats or anything. I consider them outlaws), I don't know how many, 
crowded in the door and told these people [the managers of election^ 
not to he telling anything about that killing; if they did they would 
go the same way. 

Mrs. Millsaps, the wife of the minister, requested me to go and 
see him [Mr. Meade] ; she said that Mrs. Print Matthews was suf- 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 89 

fering from heart disease and liable to die at any moment, and asked 
me to go and get them not to fire the cannon any more, and find out 
why it was fired. I saw Mr. Meade about the firing of the cannon. 
The first day he told me that if Mr. Matthews was killed, they had 
promised the club they were to fire the cannon; the second day he 
told me if there was any disturbance, they were to fire the cannon. 

On Monday night before the election, I advised Mr. Matthews 
to leave town, as I knew that crowd would kill him; he said that 
he had been raised with the sherifif and the sherifif had guaranteed 
him protection. He showed me a note from the sherifif stating that 
he would see that he was protected and not to leave town. After Mr. 
Matthews' death, I was up at the house. This mob started there sev- 
eral times. I called on Mr. Dodds and several prominent gentlemen 
in politics and asked them for the sake of the family or the ladies of 
Mr. Matthews' family, not to permit that mob to go to the house. 
They were coming there when Mr. Matthews was a corpse. I met 
no one except those who were going around with the mob who was in 
favor of going. It was with some difficulty, after mutual promises, 
that we could get the mob to disperse [even after they had assas- 
sinated Matthews]. They were around the next day [Wednesday] 
for some time. 

Yes, / went to Mr. Hargrove on the night Mr. Matthews' body 
was lying in the house when a crowd of these fellows came there and 
used all kinds of vile language, insulting language, and asked Mr. 
Hargrave to stop it and he said he was powerless and he asked me 
to mention some way in which he could put a stop to it. I told him 
to summon men and arrest these parties who were on the street. He 
asked me to give him the names of some of the men, which I did. 
I gave him the names of the best citizens of Hazlehurst; men whom 
I knew were opposed to this rioting. I think that with five men I 
could have dispersed the mob myself, if they had been called posse 
comitatus. 

When this mob was first organized I do not believe there were^ 
more than ^O men who were in favor of it; but it kept growing and 
growing until it was almost impossible for a man to remain on 
neutral ground in Copiah County. I do not think the sherifif wanted 
Mr. Matthews killed. 

J. F. DamERON 

was sworn and testified in substance, pages 211 to 213, as follows: 

I live in Jackson, Mississippi; have been merchandizing there; 
am a land owner; have been a farmer in that part of the state and 
know a man who calls himself Ras. Wheeler, who lives in Hazle- 
hurst. I saw him in a street car on the 13th or 14th of this February, 
I believe, a street car in Jackson. I remember the first thing that 
called my attention to the conversation was his statement, "Yes, old 
Hoar is coming down here with a committee and if I can get a good 
crack at him, I will kill him, too. I killed Print Matthews. I told 



90 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

him not to vote and he did it, and I killed him. It was not me that 
killed him; it was the party. ["Captain" Joe's party.] If I had not 
been a Democrat, I would not have killed him. I told him not to 
vote and he voted and I killed him. It was not me, but the Demo- 
cratic party ["Captain" Joe's brand of Democracy] ; and now if the 
party is a mind to throw me off, damn such a party." He reached 
over and touched a young gentleman who was sitting by me and 
told him, "I am the man that did the dirty work. My name is 
Wheeler; it was my lot." He seemed to have been drinking, I could 
not account for his talking to strangers in that way except that he 
seemed to be sort of soliloquizing in his cups. He was opposite me. 

H. L. BUFKIN 

was sworn and testified, pages 203 and 206, in substance as follows : 

I live in Beat 3, Copiah County, at Martinsville. / was not old 
enough to be in the Confederate army, but am a Democrat. I saw 
this armed mob on the day of the election. They were going to Spen- 
cer's Mill, it seems. They were about eight miles from Hazlehurst 
[on the road to Spencer's Mill]. There were about 20 of them, 
mounted and armed, in charge of Mr. Joe Bailey, a Democrat [he 
ought to have said "Captain" Joe], about three o'clock, going towards 
Spencer's Mill. They said there was trouble at Spencer's Mill; 
that the Independents were trying to run over things down there. I 
have a brother down there and that was the reason I was going there. 
I do not vote there. They said my brother was in it. I told them 
I wanted to go and get him away from there before they got there. 
Well, they told me I could do it, but it was getting pretty close by 
and I told them that I would hardly have time to go there, and asked 
them if they would wait for me, and they said they would. They 
said they were going to kill my brother. That was after they told 
me that I had better get him away from there. Bill Higdon [one of 
"Captain" Joe's fugitives from justice] was the first man I had a 
talk with and I asked him if they were going to kill anybody, and 
he said yes. I asked him if I might go ahead and inform my brother. 
He said he did not know; that Bailey was the Captain of the club, 
and that he must consult Bailey. I rode on and Higdon called Bailey 
back; before I got by Bailey stopped me and told me I could pass. 
[How gracious of "Captain" Joe to allow a free American citizen 
to pass him on the public roads of his native heath.] 

When I got down to Spencer's Mill, the Democrats were armed 
with shotguns and pistols. One fellow with a Winchester rifle. The 
night before I had gone up to my brother's house to advise him to 
leave. We sat up nearly all night. I felt anxiety not on account of 
myself, but of mv brother. Things looked pretty gloomy around 
Spencer's Mill. There were a good many armed men there ["Cap- 
tain" Joe and his company of 20 had arrived.] There were only 
three or four negroes around there and none of them were armed. 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 91 

J. E. Matthews 

was sworn and testified in substance, pages 233 to 238, as follows: 

I live in Copiah County, within 150 yards of Spencer's Mill, 
Beat 3. Am a farmer, but I sometimes clerk in Hazlehurst. I was 
clerking in Hazlehurst this last fall. I knew Mr. Print Matthews, 
but was not related to him. 

About three weeks previous to the election I was clerking in a 
store between the two saloons where I could hear a good deal. One 
day I did not go to dinner until the regular boarders had gotten 
through with their dinner. I was the only one at the table and the 
landlord was waiting on me. During the time that I was eating, 
two men came in and seemed to be very much excited. They sat 
down at the other end of the table. They did not notice me and I 
did not know that they knew what my politics were, or anything 
about it; but directly they sat down. Mr. Frank Thompson says, 
"It has come to pass that we must carry this election at all hazards.; 
we must carry it and the only way to do it is to kill the ring leaders." 
Beacham says, "Yes, and the quicker it is done the better." About 
that time they saw me and the conversation was hushed. This was 
Thursday before the election on Tuesday. I had heard of the beat- 
ing of old Henry Fortner and the killing of Tom Wallis and the 
shooting of his wife and all those things; but my mind was never 
made up fully that they meant to kill white people until this time. 
That was on Thursday, as I remember. I stayed there until Satur- 
day; I generally went home Saturday night. My wife sent a horse 
and buggy in for me and I went out. On Saturday evening, Dr. 
Barlow came into the store in Hazlehurst where I was clerking and 
showed me a petition that he had with about 75 names on it, a peti- 
tion to the sheriff to send out men to arrest this lawless mob tfiat was 
going around nights frightening, murdering and lulling people. I 
think the petitioners were Independents. / thinfi they were all white; 
I don't think there is a blaclz name on the list. I told him I thought 
it was a good thing. He said he was going to present it to the sheriff. 
While he was talking to me, Print Matthews and probably Burnet 
came along and they went up to the court house where the sheriflF 
of the county was, and directly, right on the corner I saw a crowd 
of men in conversation, and some of them were talking rather loud. 
I was not busy in the store, and I went out to see what they were 
talking about, and when I got out there I heard Print Matthews say 
to the sheriff, "We have got 75 names of respectable citizens of 
Copiah County, and we petition you, sir, to send us out protection." 
And as I remember it, some of the leading lawyers there were in 
favor of sending out men to suppress these and others were not. I 
know Bing Harris gave his voice against it, and said the sheriff had 
no right to send out unless he had a special affidavit against each and 
every individual name in the mob. Print Matthews asked htm how 
in the world a man could make an affidavit against a disguised mob or 
party of men; and that got up a wrangle and directly they came to the 



92 Senator J. W. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

conclusion that Dr. Barlow would make an affidavit against certain 
individuals to the best of his belief that he had seen in this mob. I 
went to Williamson's Drug Store that night; I went with him and he 
there made the affidavit. 

He (Barlow) did not feel safe to go home and I did not ieel safe 
to go by myself from the demonstrations I had seen and heard. He 
gave his horse to a party to ride and he and I went out in a buggy 
together. After the election, I think, Dr. Barlow was bulldozed 
into withdrawing the affidavit ["Captain" Joe has not quit bulldozing 
yet, as a means of suppressing pertinent evidence concerning 
himself], probably at his own expense. On Sunday I went back to 
town. I put my horse up in the livery stable and went over to J. P. 
Matthews'. Mr. Matthews was then in Jackson [appealing to Gov- 
ernor Lowry for protection]. I stayed and talked with Burnet and 
Leon Matthews until bedtime and I proposed to go back to the hotel 
and go to bed. Mrs. Matthews insisted that I should stay all night, 
that there was plenty of room. I sat down and talked a while 
longer to Leon Matthews. He remarked that he had had notice to 
leave town and was expecting them to come every moment. I told 
him that if he believed that that I would stay and take my chances 
with him. I stayed all night [Sunday], but I didn't sleep but little. 

The next morning I went to the stable to get my horse. Bill 
Marks, a Democrat and a friend of mine, advised me not to go 
home; that he had seen and heard a good deal and that that mob 
was down at my house shooting their cannon [that was Sunday 
night, after "Captain" Joe had gone out from Hazlehurst the Sun- 
day morning, when he had not time to be arrested], and that he 
thought it would not be advisable for me to go, that I might be killed. 
I told him that I was going home; that I was a free man and in a 
free country, and I was going and wanted my horse. "Well, if you 
will go, here is Colonel Brown, a staunch Democrat, and as good a 
man as there is, and he says that he wants a seat in your buggy." I 
told him that I would be glad of his company and he went to Mr. 
Brown, and Mr. Brown refused to go with me, because he thought it 
would not be safe. 

I went out in the buggy about five miles from Hazlehurst and 
/ met the viob coming in [Monday morning. "Captain" Joe had 
"quelled" them], and that was the first time 1 did get scared; I felt 
uneasy. I met Emmett Spencer with a cannon ahead and drove my 
buggy out to one side of the road, and Spencer drove by and he 
remarked, "JVe are going in to wait on Print Matthews." I had the 
Independent tickets in the buggy, but they did not know it; I sup- 
pose if they had they would have taken them away from me, and torn 
them up. ["Captain" Joe never stole "any ballots."] While the 
crowd passed on and as they passed along, one would say this thing 
and that thing. Mr. Joe Bailey as he passed, remarked, "IVe have 
been out in your neighborhood and will be back there again tonight." 
[And they did come back to Spencer's Mill that very Monday night. 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 93 

in keeping with "Captain" Joe's promise.] The next day (Tuesday) 
two negroes came to my house and told me that Jess Thompson, Jr., 
and others said that the first man to vote the Independent ticket at 
Spencer's Mill would be killed. I did not put much confidence in 
what the negroes said; I had but little dependence in Jess Thompson 
and I have got very little now. I was going to the polls to vote and 
I went to the polls and voted, but I would have given $ioo before I 
went there for any man to insure my life. I asked if they had many 
Independent votes polled, and they said, "No," and I said I had one 
to poll and I would poll it. Frank Bufkin and I were there together. 
I told them I would see that every man should vote as he pleased, or I 
would leave my dead body on the ground. About twelve o'clock 
there was a little row occurred and I took an active part in it. 
There were parties there on both sides who agreed that if myself 
and Mr. Mitchell would leave that everything would go ofif peace- 
ably and every vote should be counted as it was polled. Marion 
Higdon [one of "Captain" Joe's chums and an associate outlaw] 
said that we (the Independents) were 70 majority at twelve o'clock. 
He could not have been mistaken, because it was the resolution of 
the club that every man who voted the Democratic ticket should 
vote an open ticket and I saw three-fourths of the Independents 
that voted vote an open ticket and every man that voted a folded 
ticket was put down as an Independent. They told me if Mitchell 
and I would go o<¥ every man should vote as he pleased, and the 
vote should be counted just as it was polled. I went to my house — 
I lived close by — and directly after I left, Bill Higdon, a brother 
of Marion Higdon, got on his horse and struck out for Hazlehurst. 
I do not know what he told them, but he carried a message anyhow 
that the Independents here had taken the box and created a riot, and 
all these sort of things. [It seems this was the only box where the 
Independents had a half a show and when they outvoted "Captain" 
Joe's crowd it was too bad and something had to be done.] It resulted 
in about 25 armed men with double barrel shotguns coming back 
there to kill Mitchell and myself and Bufkin. [This is the crowd 
concerning which H. D. Bufkin testified as being in charge of "Cap- 
tain" Joe out on the road that afternoon between Hazlehurst and 
Spencer's Mill.] When they came there was a Democratic negro 
that Jess Thompson had taken out of jail who was convicted. They 
sent him up to my house to tell me to come down and surrender, that 
this mob was going to have me at all hazards. I put my pistol to his 
head and told him to tell that mob that I was only one man and had 
done nothing to be killed for, but I was at my home and I had five 
double barrel shotguns loaded with buckshot and I would empty 
every barrel of them before I was taken. ["Captain" Joe should! 
have charged this renegade, because "Captain" Joe is a brave man. 
He told us so here in San Antonio last winter at the time he related 
having removed his pistol from his grip to his pocket in order to 
close the abusive mouths of two of his "enemies" who were talking 



94 Senator J. W. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

about him on an adjacent seat in a railway coach.] He went back 
and didn't come again. When I went away from the polls at noon, 
the Democratic inspector informed me that the Independents were 
70 ahead. When the vote was counted as turned in [after "Captain" 
Joe and his mob had been on the ground awhile], they claimed we 
only had 23 Independent votes altogether, and that they were 80 
ahead [and yet "Captain" Joe "never stole any ballots nor allowed 
anybody else to do so"]. 

The next day after the election I had business down in the lower 
part of the Beat. When I got my horse that morning, my intention 
was to go to Hazlehurst and see Print Matthews. [The witness evi- 
dently had not heard of Mr. Matthews' death.] I considered him a 
good friend of mine and I wanted to see him, but parties told me it 
would not be safe for me to go, that I would probably be killed, and 
I then turned my horse and went down into the lower part of the 
Beat; and the next morning about sunup I was about ten or eleven 
miles from my home. My wife had sent a runner to where I was 
to tell me not to come home, but to leave the county; that there had 
been about 40 or 50 armed men with double barrel shotguns and 
pistols in a rude, angry and threatening manner, who had come to 
my house and demanded me and I was not there. [That was doubt- 
less the fulfillm.ent of the promise that "Captain" Joe Bailey made 
to Mr. Matthews on Monday morning as the latter was going from 
Hazlehurst to Spencer's Mill, and as "Captain" Joe and his bull- 
dozers, having been "quelled," were going to Hazlehurst to "call on 
Print Matthews."] Well, I did not know what to do. I got on my 
horse and started for home. My friends advised me not to go, and 
said that I could not contend against the mob, and I concluded that 
I had better take to the woods for a time, and I did it. I did not go 
home for several days. I went home about three days after that, 
but / went in the night and I left in the night. 

For ten days before the election that part of the country was in 
a perfectly demoralized state. 

D. C. Barlow 

was sworn and testified, pages 243 to 244, in substance as follows: 

Live in Copiah County; vote at Spencer's Mill. I reckon it 
must have been two weeks before the election that this armed mob 
were around in that neighborhood firing. I met one of those Wallis 
boys going after a Justice of the Peace to hold an inquest over his 
father. I was at Spencer's Mill pretty early on election day. Finally 
Bob Allen, who lived near by, walked up to me and said that Dr. 
Barlow had sworn a lie on him and I remarked to him that that was 
pretty rough talk; that my understanding was that it was a fine time 
to have rows at election, and I would wait a time, and he went on 
and called us s — s-of-b — s, and all sorts of names and turned around 
and Mr. Matthews and a lot of them had gone down to dinner and I 
was giving out tickets while they were at dinner, and somebody ran 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 95 

down there and told them that there was about to be a row and they 
went up there and Mr. Matthews asked me what it was about. 
Matthews and a young man named Waynes got into a talk about it, 
and finally they drew their pistols. Pretty quick Bill Higdon went to 
Hazlehurst and when they came back it was late in the evening. I 
asked a young man by the name of Willis Graham, kin folks of mine, 
who was in this bunch of men [it was just "Captain" Joe and his 
bulldozers], and all of them had double barreled shotguns; I asked 
him what did they mean, and he said Bill Higdon went up to Hazle- 
hurst and told them that the Independents had captured the box and 
would not let the Democrats vote. They [this crowd of bulldozers 
that came down with "Captain" Joe] stayed awhile there and cau- 
cused around, and I was the only Independent there, except my 
uncle and he was inspector at the box; and they got about in bunches, 
and caucused and I thought it might be private talk and I had better 
not be stepping up in private talk, and I did not hear them talk 
much, but I understand there that Joe Bailey said it was too far to 
ride and do nothing [If he had heard all that "Captain" Joe did say, 
and could have repeated it, this chapter would doubtless contain 
some additional interesting testimony] ; that they did not want to 
come up that far for nothing, and at the time the polls ivere closed 
they counted out the tickets and the highest Independent was 21, so 
they said, and they remarked that there was 8o majority for the Dem- 
ocrats. [This is the box where the Independents' majority was 70 
at noon, and thus the entire Independent vote was only 21 when 
"Captain" Joe and his bulldozers got through "doing something."] 

Yancy Tillman 

was sworn and testified in substance, pages 244 to 246, as follows: 

I live in Copiah County, Beat 3. Vote at Spencer's Mill, where 
I was on election day. Higdon brought a message that Matthews 
was dead. There was a whole crowd of the armed mob standing 
around talking and he [the messenger] came up and said that 
Wheeler had sent word to the boys of Beat 3 that he did not quite 
fill his promise. He had promised them all that Print Matthews 
should not vote, but he did drop his ticket in; and as he dropped his 
ticket in, he dropped him; and somebody wanted to know how 
Wheeler did it, and he said, "It looked about like he had shot a 
rabbit." 

I know about the mob going to Ed. Matthews' house [this was 
the witness who was not related to Print Matthews]. His house is 
about I2t; yards from where I live. It looked like there were 30, 
31; or 40 [this was the visit that "Captain" Joe had promised Mr. 
Matthews]. They were on horseback and armed, some with guns 
and some with pistols. They went and inquired for him. They 
remarked that he was not at home. Some had pistols in their hands 
and I could not understand what they were saying. Some went to 
the negro houses over there on the place, and some came back. They 



96 Senator J. W. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

went over there and inquired for him. They came on back and I do 
not know where they did go to. [Matthews had left home.] 

F. M. BUFKIN 

was sworn and testified in substance, as follows, pages 256 to 265 : 

I live in Copiah County, Beat 3. Have lived there all my life, 
about 41 years. / served in the Confederate army four years. My 
family was at Ras. Matthews' store [in the country]. We were to 
have a meeting there that night for the purpose of stopping this crowd 
of bulldozers or mob from going through our neighborhood. They 
had sent word they were coming and I stayed until the crowd came, 
that mob, mounted and armed with double barreled shotguns and 
pistols. They came up in front of the store. I was on the gallery at 
the time. One of the parties just remarked to an outsider that they 
were going to shoot into the store and burn it up ; a young man, son of 
Colonel Jones, came to me and told me if he were in my place, he 
would go off the gallery. I stepped off the gallery and Mr. Dunbar 
came along and we walked off a piece into the woods. He said, 
"You had better lay down," and I said, "No, I would go back and 
hear what I could." In the first crowd that came there were about 
75. They called on Joe Bailey to make a speech, but I do not know 
that Joe Bailey was there [the members of the mob must have known 
it, or they would not have called on him for a speech]. 

On election day I was at Spencer's Mill. About twelve o'clock 
they had a little difficulty there. Everything went ofif peaceable and 
quietly until just about twelve o'clock. 

Bill Higdon, a Democrat inspector, told me that the Indepen- 
dents were 70 ahead. That is the way the vote stands, and he says, 
I advise you to go home and keep quiet and I pledge you my word 
that you shall have a fair count and everything will be carried on 
all right. Finally our vote ranged from 21 to 24 and they claimed 
80 majority. [This was after "Captain" Joe had come on the scene 
and said that it was "too far to ride without doing something."] 

H. H. Barlow 

was sworn and testified in substance, pages 238 to 243, as follows: 

Reside in Copiah County, Beat 3. Did business mostly in Hazle- 
hurst. I run a little store 16 miles west of Hazlehurst, and farm 
also. I was born in Louisiana, but came to Mississippi when I was 
two or three years old. 

After the mob had been active in our neighborhood there was 
gotten up a petition with a long list of respectable white men down 
there (that is largely Independent down in that country), and they 
were all opposed to it [the lawlessness]. It kept their families dis- 
turbed by the guns firing, the negroes disturbed, and there was just 
a reign of terror, and they petitioned the sheriff to put it down. I 
went up there and presented it to Mr. Hargrave. J. P. Matthews 
went along with me. In that petition it stated the condition of mat- 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 97 

ters in Beat 3; that there was a reign of terror there and an armed 
mob going about at night driving people out, shooting and whipping 
them. The signers of the petition asked the sheriff to come and put 
it down and if he could not do it, to appoint them and they would. 
Mr. Hargrave saw Captain Ramsey and Judge Mays and they ad- 
vised him, under the circumstances, to send a man down there; they 
were to send a deputy along with me. Then we met Captain Harris 
and Mr. Meade on the street and they advised Hargrave that 
it would be impossible for him to send a man down without there 
were affidavits made, reciting the crimes and all, before he could 
make any arrests. I told Captain Harris that some of these men 
went to the houses blacked; that they had false-faces on and that 
I could not tell who they were; that I was a law-abiding citizen and 
would like to put it down, but would not consent to swearing to an 
affidavit against anybody unless I knew who it was. / swore out a 
warrant against Wheeler, Joe Ba/Vf-y ["Captain" Joe, the Mississippi 
importation, and the present idol of grafters everywhere], and sev- 
eral others that I knew. 

William Robertson 

was sworn and testified in substance, pages 250 to 256, as follows: 

I do not think that any large number of Democrats of that county 
approve of the violence of Wheeler towards Matthews, or of the 
action of Wheeler in killing Matthews. There are very few that ap- 
prove of the doings of that crowd. There was about JS persons in 
that crowd. They passed right along by my door. I was sitting out 
on a bench ; I saw them. 

William L. Mitchell 

was sworn and testified in substance, as follows, pages 266-273 : 

Have lived in Copiah County four or five years. Am running 
the local paper there, the Signal. Was in Hazlehurst just previous 
to the election in November, 1883. Was associated with Mr. Meade 
in the management of the Signal. He was editor at the time. I 
have been editor since. He was in the office Monday morning and 
asked me for his overcoat. He said, "I am going out to meet these 
men who are coming in." It was reported that they were about a 
mile ofif; he told me his object in going: That there had been some 
excitement on account of warrants or affidavits that had been made out, 
and he wanted to allay any excitement and to caution those men on 
account of the sickness, he said, in Mr. Matthews' family. [This 
was a partisan Democratic witness and this testimony in connection 
with other evidence shows conclusively that the mob would have 
confined its crimes to the country districts, except for the fact that 
J. P. Matthews approved of the filing of the affidavits and issuance 
of the warrants and was a strong man in the matter of prospective 
prosecution of "Captain" Joe and his associates.] Yes, sir; I heard 
what afterwards took place between Mr. Meade and that body of 



98 Senator J. W. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

men or their leaders; I was present at a — it was not a meeting — I 
don't know what we would call it, that took place back of the court 
house. 1 went around as a matter of curiosity, and they were discuss- 
ing the passage of some resolution in regard to requesting Mr. Mat- 
thews to absent himself from the county for twenty-four or forty- 
eight hours, and not to vote. They discussed it a while and Mr. 
Meade afterward said he had made a promise to Mr. Matthews that 
he should not be molested, and if they went any further that he was 
done and would have no more to do with it (the mob) and he rode off 
and came down town. 

I do not know what transpired before they came into town, or how 
many they had with them. There were about 75 to 100 in town. 
Our paper is strongly Democratic but we never countenanced or en- 
couraged anything of that kind. These men were very much exercised 
on account of those affidavits which had been made against them. Yes, 
Mr. Meade said to me that he was going out because he had promised 
Mr. Matthews to protect him if they attempted to do anything. I 
understood that they afterwards [after Meade left them back of the 
courthouse] passed resolutions advising Mr. Matthews to leave town 
or not to vote. I can better tell the names of those who were in the 
procession by families. There were three or four of the Baileys 
[worse than ever], and the Davises, the Cranberries, the Starnes and 
Browns, and several others and one or two Thompsons. There was 
Mr. Birdsong, Penns and Higdons. Is that enough? / do not en- 
dorse the resolutions they passed at all, nor the proceedings, — the kill- 
ing of Matthews. I think the violation of any of the criminal laws 
is an outrage. 

John T. Hull 

was sworn and testified in substance, pages 368 to 381, as follows: 

I reside in Jackson, Mississippi. During the last campaign I 
published the Jackson Tribune. I was the senior editor of the Tri- 
bune and as such read the Copiah County papers very closely. The 
Copiah County Signal did not denounce the methods pursued in 
Copiah County, but, on the contrary, it seems to me that every issue 
of that paper fanned the flame; whereas the Copiahian, a Democratic 
paper was read out of the party before the election. The Copiahian 
is an old established paper, published there for years and Col. Vance, 
editor of the paper, although a Democrat, was very conservative in 
his views and supposed to be fair and willing to publish all sides. 
During the last election, he gave items of news from the Independ- 
ents and seemed to displease the Democrats there, and I noticed a 
few weeks before the election that nearly every issue of the Copiah 
County Signal, Meade's paper, and the Crystal Springs Meteor, con- 
tained a series of resolutions from different clubs throughout the 
county in which the Copiahian was condemned and the support of 
the Democrats that had theretofore been given to that paper was 
asked to be withdrawn. ["Captain" Joe evidently had early train- 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 99 

ing also in newspaper manipulation: note what follows]. The For- 
rest Hill club adopted resolutions on the 13th of October, as follows: 
"Resolved that since we regard the Copiahian, a paper published by 
J. F. Vance, as an enemy to the welfare of the Democratic party, that 
all members of this club taking said paper, stop their subscriptions to 
said paper after this meeting." Also; "Resolved that Brown's Store 
club endorse the action of Crystal Springs Club in withdrawing all 
subscriptions and advertising patronage from the Copiahian." 

J. P. Matthews made on some Saturday before the election, as 
reported in the Weekly Copiahian, a speech in which is found the 
following: "1 read a secret circular from the banks urging all bank- 
ers to look after a control of their members of Congress in the inter- 
est of monopolies and for the oppression and plunder of the people. 
This circular urged bankers to the importance of controlling and shap- 
ing the course of papers; and that the Democratic nominees E. W. 
Brown, G. F. Wolfe, A. B. Guynes, E. A. Rowan, T. J. Hargrave, 
Bob Miller, R. W. Millsapps, candidates; Harwell Cook, merchant; 
J. W. Bailey, lawyer; with one I. N. Ellis, banker, who furnished the 
money had bought the signal in compliance with this circular. 
["Captain" Joe was getting his first lessons in newspaperdom which 
he has since used to such advantage in Texas in the handling of the 
Fort Worth (Bailey) Record; the Houston (Bailey) Boast; and the 
Austin (Bailey) Statesman.] 

"The Copiahian is a paper run in the interest of the great mass of 
the people, a paper which has lent its whole energy in the past for 
good government, and yet it has been abandoned by the court house 
ring because the editor is too honest to sell out the interest of the hard- 
fisted yeomenry to banks, corporations and rings. Who led you in the 
past to victory? This paper you are now trying to crush. Oh, jus- 
tice, hast thou fled to brutish beasts, when men are so ungrateful." In 
speaking of the way the Democrats handled the negroes and of their 
criticism of the Independents in the same matter, the speaker con- 
tinued: "In other words, the man (Independent) is no man (ac- 
cording to the Democratic standard) when he consents to receive the 
votes of the Republicans openly, yet your Democratic candidates will 
take the darky around the corner and pat him on the shoulder and I 
understand some of you have been attending the colored protracted 
meeting, a thing which, should I do, or any other man on the oppo- 
sition ticket, would be considered by you Simon Pure Democrats as 
unpardonable and every little newspaper in the country would hurl 
it in our faces." 

"I have known Mr. Burnet for a number of years. His family is 
as honorable a one as there is in the State. I have heard considerable 
in his praise, a great deal in his praise, from the opposition, and from 
men who are naturally very bitter and extreme. I think Col. Stewart, 
who met him in joint discussion, spoke of him in terms of friendship 
and of pleasure at meeting him; appreciated him as a man of in- 
telligence. [Burnet was the man that was shot bv "Captain" Joe's 
friend for denying that he "made sport of Bailey"]." 



100 Senator ]. W. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

(The witness identified the following newspaper excerpts as dis- 
cussions of the Copiah County outrages at the time.) The Brook- 
haven Leader is a Democratic paper, and under date of December 
13, 1883, said: "T'/j^ killing of Matthews was bad; the passage of 
the now famous Copiah resolutions against his family was much 
worse; but the appointment of Wheeler as marshal of Hazlehurst as a 
peace officer, before he had passed through even the formality of a 
trial — well, that caps the climax." Here is an article from the Vicks- 
burg Post, a Democratic paper of December 22, 1883 • "As a matter of 
general interest we print today a communication purporting to give 
a truthful statement of the killing of J. P. Matthews and of the bad 
condition of politics in Copiah County. The correspondent bears 
us out in the opinion we expressed weeks ago, that the good people 
of Copiah County do not approve of the killing of Matthews. When 
the good and quiet people of that county have the opportunity they 
will rebuke those who are now carrying things with such a high hand 
and who pretend to represent the true sentiment of the people of that 
unfortunate county. From the facts developed and statements from 
all sources in regard to the killing it would be strange if even a com- 
munity of savages could honestly sanction such a terrible murder; 
and when the pressure ceases, and the true sentiment of the people 
finds expression, it will be found that a large majority of the citizens 
of Copiah are utterly opposed to the killing and to the resolutions of 
the Hazlehurst mass meeting. The writer of the communication is 
a Democrat, and opposed to the Matthews party in the recent elec- 
tion. * * * 

Of course our people do not want and will not submit to a rule of 
ignorance and corruption, but this can be averted without committing 
such a terrible murder as was that of Matthews, and without passing 
such foolish and intolerant resolutions as those of the Hazlehurst 
mass meeting." 

George S. Dodds 

was sworn and testified, in part, pages 484 to 502, as follows: 

Am a lawyer and a merchant, live at Hazlehurst [this witness was 
one of the lawyers for the defense]. The voters of the town had noth- 
ing to do with the election of IV heeler as Marshal and were strongly 
opposed to it. Three of the councilmen were for him and two 
were against him. I went up to the meeting (Wednesday). It had 
been organized and this young man Bailey who has been spoken 
of here was addressing the meeting. The crowd seemed to be excited 
and the attempt on the part of Major Barry, whose idea was just as 
mine was, and whose objection to the resolution was the same as mine, 
having been hissed down, I withdrew from the meeting and left 
them there, and I was not there when the resolutions were voted upon 
at all. [This scene of disorder and excitement lead by "Captain" 
Joe was somewhat similar to that presented by the Thirtieth Legis- 
lature of Texas, Feb. 27, 1907, when "Captain" Joe made his vitriolic 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 101 

address on the night of his final dishonor, sometimes said to have been 
the night of his "exoneration."] On Monday 1 went to the crowd 
and spoke to some of their leading spirits and asked them not to go to 
Mr. Matthews' house and disturb his daughter. I could name quite 
a number of men: Jess Thompson, Jr., Emmett Spencer, the Messrs. 
Higdon, some of the Middleton family, and some young Baileys, I 
think Mr. West was there. [Perhaps "Captain" Joe had enlisted 
some of his relatives in this war for pie, place and power, which he 
has since, throughout his whole life, prosecuted so vigorously.] 



102 Senator J. W. Bailey oi Texas Unmasked 



ANTIDOTES FOR BAILEYISM. 



Who knows himself a braggart, let him fear this; for it will come 
to pass that every braggart shall be found an ass. — Shakespeare. 

Men of real merit, whose noble and glorious deeds we are ready 
to acknowledge are not yet to be endured when they vaunt their own 
actions. — Aeschines. 

Usually the greatest boasters are the smallest workers. The deep 
rivers pay a larger tribute to the sea than shallow brooks, and yet 
empty themselves with less noise. — IF. Seeker. 

The man or the politician who cannot listen, dispassionately and 
profitably listen to criticisms from his fellow men without a flood of 
anger and revenge filling his heart with bitterness and hate, must be 
very wicked (guilty), or very weak; perhaps both. — The Author. 

With all his tumid boasts, he's like the sword-fish, who only wears 
his weapon in his mouth. — Madden. 

Conceit, more rich in matter than in words, brags of his 
substance; they are but beggars who can count their worth. — 
Shakespeare. 

Self-laudation abounds among the unpolished, but nothing can 
stamp a man more sharply as ill-bred. — Charles Buxton. 

Whom the gods would destroy, they first make mad. — Anon. 

The empty vessel makes the greatest sound. — Shakespeare. 

Fools rush in where angels fear to tread. — Pope. 

Borrowing is not much better than begging. — Lessing. 

Spite ana spleen, hate and revenge are brutish; they mark not the 

conduct of just and thinking men. — The Author. 

If you would know the value of money, go and try to borrow some. 
He that goes a-borrowing goes a-sorrowing. — Franklin. 

Neither a borrower, nor a lender be; for loan oft loses both itself 
and friend; and borrowing dulls the edge of husbandry. — Shakes- 
peare. 

Getting into debt, is getting into a tanglesome net. — Franklin. 

Pride goeth before destruction and a haughty spirit before a 
iM.—The Scriptures. 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 103 

Some one praising a man for his foolhardy bravery, Cato, the 
elder, said, "There is a wide difference between true courage and a 
mere contempt of life." — Plutarch. 

At the bottom of not a little of the bravery that appears in the 
world, there lurks a miserable cowardice. Men will face powder 
and steel because they have not the courage to face public opinion. — 
E. H. Chapin. 

Words are like leaves, and where they most abound, much fruit 
of sense beneath is rarely found. — Pope. 

To only such men as can rise above the trite and transitory inci- 
dents and blinding objects of personal hate, selfish egotism, and false 
pride, is revealed the upper atmosphere of pure reason, holy thought, 
comprehensive vision, and helpful meditation. — The Author. 

The universe is not rich enough to buy the vote of an honest man. 
— Gregory. 

^ Though authority be a stubborn bear, yet he is oft led by the nose 
with gold. — Shakespeare. 

A man who is furnished with arguments from the mint, will 
convince his antagonist much sooner than one who draws them from 
reason and philosophy. Gold is a wonderful clearer of the understand- 
ing; it dissipates every doubt and scruple in an instant; accommo- 
dates itself to the meanest capacities; silences the loud and clamorous, 
and cringes over the most obstinate and inflexible. Philip of Mace- 
don was a man of most invincible reason this way. He refuted by it 
all the wisdom of Athens; confounded their statesmen; struck their 
orators dumb; and at length argues them out of all their liberties. — 
Addison. 

When a man is a brute, he is the most sensual and loathsome of all 
brutes. — Hawthorne, 



104 Senator J. Jl'. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 



CHAPTER VII. 

BAILEY'S EARLY EXPERIENCES IN TEXAS— POLITICAL 
AND OTHERWISE. 

Prior to the disgraceful occurrences and lawless conduct de- 
scribed in the preceding pages, during the summer of 1883, Mr. 
Bailey stood for the Democratic nomination to the Mississippi legis- 
lature before the nominating convention of the Democratic party of 
Copiah County. In this aspiration he was defeated, but about this 
he has been careful never to speak, so far as the author is informed, 
although he has never missed an opportuunity to boast of his selection 
as Democratic elector in the year 1884. 

During the year 1884 the most radical machine politicians and 
newspapers were ready to put forward a man like Bailey. "At that 
period too," writes a gentleman thoroughly conversant with the con- 
temporaneous political history of Mississippi, "it may be said in all 
truth that Mississippi had the most formidable and unscrupulous 
Democratic party machine and press of any period within my recol- 
lection." Bailey was ready and anxious for political preferment, 
both then and now regardless of the means; Meade and his click, who 
were more or less implicated in the riots, were ready to force a man 
like Bailey on the party and thus was an extreme partisan spirit em- 
ployed to white-wash the past, carry him through and thus cover up 
the unsavory record he and others had made in the Copiah County 
campaign without causing an immediate party revolt. 

"But it is more than likely that Joe would not have secured the 
nomination as an elector even under these circumstances," writes the 
same Democratic authority, "but for the fact that the position of 
elector was purely an honorary one. At that time, too, it was neces- 
sary for the nominee to make quite an expensive campaign at his own 
expense and Bailey was supplied liberally at that period with money 
from his rich uncle, who had not yet tired of his extravagance and 
methods. 

"Again, Bailey was the only aspirant for the nomination in this 
district, and it is not surprising that he should have received the nomi- 
nation for whicli there was no other candidate." 

The nomination of Bailey was stoutly opposed by the Vicksburg 
Post and the Leader as well as by other Democratic papers, but there 
being no other person seeking the place, Joe landed the nomination 
when the District convention 'met, and, of course, the nomination was 
then, as now, equivalent to an election. 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 105 

IT WAS DIFFERENT THE NEXT YEAR 1 885. 

Most of the individuals who participated actively with "Captain" 
Joe in the Copiah County tragedies of 1883 are now dead. All the 
immediate family of J. P. Matthews except a son and daughter are 
deceased. 

Joe L. Meade and Joe Purser sought new pastures by moving to 
Birmingham, Alabama, soon after the Senatorial investigation, A 
few years after the assassination of Mr. Matthews, Ras. Wheeler 
emigrated from Mississippi and died somewhere in Southern 
Texas, away from home and friends, a vagabond on the earth as was 
Cain of old. This was he of whom Joe said in a public address, 
"My friend Wheeler is a noble electioneerer." 

Ex-Sheriff Hargrave, who seems to have been nothing more than 
potters' clay in the hands of Meade, Bailey, Wheeler & Co., died the 
early part of year 1907. 

It is interesting to note that in the early part of 1885, after Cleve- 
land was inaugurated, J. L. Meade, who figured as Democratic 
County Chairman, and who at least winked at Joe's lawlessness and 
bulldozing propensities, was appointed Post-master at Hazlehurst 
by Mr. Cleveland on the recommendation of the Democratic Con- 
gressman Barksdale. But as soon as President Cleveland learned, 
which he did shortly after the appointment, who Meade really was 
and the part he had borne, though somewhat in disguise, in the 
Copiah county outrages, the President promptly revoked Meade's 
pppointment and gave the position to J . JV. McMaster. 

This, of course, was a great rebuke to Meade and his crowd of 
bulldozers from a Democratic president. He became very indignant, 
just as "Captain" Joe has become on many occasions since, and at- 
tempted to secure a vindication and in turn rebuke President Cleve- 
land by becoming a candidate for representative from Copiah County 
before the County Democratic Convention of that year (1885). He 
was signally defeated, however, and left the state. 

This was likewise a severe rebuke to "Captain" Joe from Presi- 
dent Cleveland and perhaps this is one of the reasons that Congress- 
man Bailey afterwards found it very irksome and unpleasant to serve 
as a congressman from Texas during the second Cleveland adminis- 
tration. The refusal of Copiah County Democracy to endorse Meade 
for the Legislature after he had been ousted by Cleveland was like- 
wise "a reflection on Bailey." 

Dr. A. B. Pitts, who figured as a witness before the Senatorial 
Investigating Committee in New Orleans in 1884, now states to the 
author's correspondent that,"//z^ fact of the conspiracy to assassinate 
Maithews if he attempted to vote on election day, was fully estab- 
lished by a detailed confession of the affair voluntarily made to him 
a few days afterwards by E. B. or Ras. Wheeler, the assassin, who 
said he had been selected 'hy lot' to commit the diabolical deed." Dr. 
Pitts is still one of the leading physicians of Hazelhurst, Miss., and 
one of the most reliable men in Copiah County. 



106 Senator J. W. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

BAILEY MIGRATES TO TEXAS, IN THE YEAR 1 885. 

Bailey, having failed to acquire a law practice at Hazlehurst, 
and having failed also to acquire political influence of saleable vol- 
ume or quality, his star of empire westward led, and about the month 
of June, 1885, he pitched his tent on the broad prairies of North 
Texas, locating in Gainesville, Cook County. From that time for- 
ward he seems, bv hook or crook, to have found political pastures 
green in which to forage and grow fat financially and otherwise. 

It seems to have been a serious misfortune to Mr. Bailey that he 
has never, since his early youth, been in a position, or under the neces- 
sity, of developing financial self-reliance along normal and legitimate 
lines. No sooner had he come "West to grow up with the country," 
than an arrangement was effected with his supposed benefactor, the 
elder Weldon, a Pennsylvania bachelor, by which the latter sent him 
for investment about the sum of $100,000.00, including $10,000.00 
belonging to Miss Mary Bailey, a sister of Bailey's father, who re- 
sided with the elder Weldon. 

The following excerpt is from a signed letter in the possession of 
the author from one of the most reliable Attorneys in Mr. Bailey's 
home city: "William Weldon had an estate of the value of about 
$100,000.00 consisting principally of interest-bearing securities. His 
niece. Miss Mary Bailey, had an estate of about $10,000.00, consist- 
ing of like securities. This uncle, William Weldon, educated J. W. 
Bailey. When Bailey came to Gainesville, his uncle and aunt sold 
the securities in which their property was invested and sent the money 
to J. W. Bailey to be invested in real estate in Gainesville and Cook 
County. The uncle executed to J. W. Bailey a power of attorney 
authorizing him to buy, sell and encumber land in the name of the 
uncle. Bailey mismanaged and wasted the property entrusted to his 
care. When the uncle investigated the matter about 1890, he found 
that he owned nothing free of encumberance. He died about 1891, 
leaving a will in which he devised his entire estate to his niece. Miss 
Mary Bailey. Out of the entire property, her own as well as that of 
her uncle, entrusted to the care of J. W. Bailey, she received nothing 
except a farm of about 1,000 acres west of Gainesville which cost 
about $10,000.00 or $12,000.00, and which was encumbered at the 
time it was turned over to her for as much as it cost. Practically, she 
received nothing from the $100,000.00 worth of property which was 
entrusted to J. W. Bailey. Bailey claimed that he had lost the money. 
It is probably true that he lost the most of it. It was afterwards de- 
veloped, however, that during all of this time, he had horses and in- 
terests in Kentucky, and quite a number of people suspicioned that 
some of the money entrusted to him by his uncle and aunt was in- 
vested in Kentucky and not accounted for." 

These things being true, is it any wonder that the people of Texas 
should have likewise since been betrayed by a man of such habits, 
such training and such ideals? 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 107 

On one occasion after Bailey had wasted the substance of his 
benefactor in riotous living, never having earned any honest money 
to speak of by his own labor, a judgment against him in Texas was 
re-established in Kentucky and an execution sought to be levied upon 
his race horses there. Then it was that the late Colonel Jot Gunter 
made claim to the horses as his property and thus were the decrees 
of the courts of two States held as of naught. Long-time citizens 
of North Texas, familiar with the circumstances, say that Colonel 
Gunter frequently complained at Bailey's indebtedness to him and 
occasionally denounced him most bitterly. But after Francis and 
Pierce and Kirby and Harriman and Standard Oil became his bank- 
ers, he probably made good to Colonel Gunter and thus asserted his 
claim for support against the latter. 

A banker who claimed to be cognizant of the facts, once told the 
author that at the time Bailey first offered for congress his credit in 
Gainesville had ebbed so low as to render him unable to purchase 
so much as a beefsteak on credit. 

It is quite generally believed, by those familiar with his early 
career in Texas, that a few well to do cattle-men having head-quar- 
ters at Gainesville, but owning large stock interests in Oklahoma and 
the Indian Territory, took up Bailey's political aspirations, paid oflf 
some $10,000.00 or $11;, 000.00 worth of his debts, and thus enabled 
him to stand for Congress. They needed a special pleader before 
the Interior Department at Washington in the matter of their Indian 
Territory land leases. This phase of his career, however, and the 
testimony, bearing thereon, will be considered under the chapter en- 
titled, "Supplemental Charges Stated and Discussed." 

BAILEY, AS A PATRON SAINT OF THE MINISTRY, AND A LOCAL OPTIONIST 

PRETENDER. 

It seems that Bailey began to "hanker" after the political flesh- 
pots with an Egyptian longing even before the funds supplied him 
as a trustee had been expended in devious ways. He began to go to 
political conventions and to exercise his "gift of gab" as early as 
1887 when he made prohibition speeches in Cook County during 
that year. In this connection, it is quite interesting to note the fol- 
lowing language from a recent letter to the author by a Mississippian 
who knew him well and intimately during his residence at Hazle- 
hurst as a young lawyer: "In regard to Mr. J. Weldon Bailey's record 
while in Alississippi, it was anything but reputable." 

In the recent Local Option campaign in Cook County whereby 
that county was carried by the antis, it is said that Mr. Bailey was 
importuned to assist the local optionists by making some speeches in 
behalf of their cause. This, it is said, he refused to do. Whether 
or not Dr. Rankin of Dallas will now excommunicate "Joe" for his 
alleged lack of loyalty, remains to be seen. Suffice it to say that Dr. 
Rankin, a specialist as a political theologian or a theological poli- 



108 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

tician, is quoted as having said last winter, that "unless it could be 
shown that Mr. Bailey had violated some criminal statute, he, Ran- 
kin, would continue to support him." Let us ask: Is it possible that 
our'christian ministers have fallen so low in their ethical ideals, con- 
ceptions and teachings as to subscribe to the proposition that every 
unjailed rascal is a fit subject for the United States Senate? If so, 
such conclusion must be based upon the old theory that what is, is 
right— especially so it is believed, if such unconvicted renegade poses 
as a so-called prohibitionist. 

Mr. Bailey has frequently boasted that 98 per cent of the minis- 
ters of Texas are for him. If so, may the Lord have compassion on 
the ministers! While there are doubtless some ministers still blinded 
by the cheap trappings and glossy gildings of this now celebrated 
charlatan, the author has yet to meet in his travels a single minister 
so deluded. Here is an estimate of Mr. Bailey recently made to a 
minister by a fellow clergyman now resident in the town of Gaines- 
ville: "I cannot understand why the people of Texas have been so 
thoroughly hoodwinked by this fellow Bailey. He is cheap and 
coarse and shallow and bitter and mean." What more could a min- 
ister say concerning a man without violating the proprieties of min- 
isterial decorum and address! 

Mr. Bailey has also characteristically boasted that, "All good 
women are for me." Are Texans to infer, as they must infer, that this 
cajoler insults their gallantry by inferentially asserting that "all 
women who are against me are bad women?" Such effrontery, 
balderash and insulting suggestions are well calculated to put this 
mountebank beyond the circle of respectability. Indeed the truth is, 
that he has never in the opinion of multiplied thousands of gallant 
and decent Texans, occupied a place within the circle of respectabil- 
ity. "He that exalteth himself shall be abased, but he who humbleth 
himself shall be exalted." 
POLITICAL REMINISCENCES DURING HIS EARLY CONGRESSIONAL CAREER. 

Having taken his seat in 1891, Bailey attracted some notoriety, 
for which he always craves, by refusing to don the conventional dress 
attire proper on a certain occasion. This posing and strutting has been 
very characteristic of the man, varied from time to time according to 
the circumstances, and gauged by his changed and changing atti- 
tudes and relationships from time to time. 

For example: Note the fact that in his early congressional ser- 
vice (or should we say lack of honest service), he played to the gal- 
leries by pretending that he desired that the Sergeant at Arms dock 
his salary on account of his having lost a day or so from his congres- 
sional duties by reason of having gone over into one of the Virginias 
to make an address. • If he was sincere in that holier than thou atti- 
tude, why do you suppose he drew his full salary during the session 
of congress in the year 1Q03 while he spent the greater part of the 
winter at the Waldorf-Astoria, and possibly at 26 Broadway (Stand- 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 109 

ard Oil Office) New York? The congressional record shows that 
from the middle of January, 1903 to the last days of February of that 
year, his name was not recorded in a single aye and no vote taken in 
the senate. During this time he was earning (?) his $225,000.00 
from Kirby and the Railroad interests. He had grown rich, and ac- 
cording to his earlier pretentions he should not have charged the 
U. S. Treasury with the payment of his salary during those absences. 
Again, Oily Joe attended the last session of congress beginning 
in the early days of December and closing on the 4th of March, 1907, 
only the very last day of that session — Sunday. Now, the author has 
tried to get the Secretary of the Senate to furnish him a list of gov- 
ernmental disbursements to the Senators during that period, but it 
seems that a citizen of this country is not entitled to know about gov- 
ernmental expenditures in such matters until those expenditures have 
been first presented to "the treason of the senate." It has been sug- 
gested by a gentleman frequently in Washington that one of the rea- 
sons Joe was so anxious to conclude the suppression at Austin in 
February, 1907, was that he might hurry to Washington before the 
Congress actually adjourned in order to collect his salary and $700.00 
mileage — a thing he could not have done, it is stated, except he at- 
tended the Congress while it was yet in session. It was sufficient, 
perhaps, for the purposes mentioned, that he should have been pres- 
ent, with his consoling presence, and his vessel of oil (Standard Oil, 
if you please,) at the final ceremonies and distressing demise of that 
august assemblage where Piatt, Depew, Aldrich (Oil-Rich) and 
Boss Bailey, of Texas, sing their last sad requiems over the parting 
shadows of the House of Graft. It has been facetiously said that 
if Texas was tired of Bailey, New York, would like to barter her 
two senators for our one. Pray, would not New York do well to ex- 
change two grafters for one? Upon reflection: Not if that one 
could otitgraft the other two. 

BAILEY QUITS THE LAW FOR POLITICS. 

Having utterly failed in his supposed efforts at building up a law 
practice, which efforts seem to have in fact been directed towards the 
early and complete dissipation of the trust funds belonging to his 
benefactors, Bailey proceeded to dispose of his law library from time 
to time. As to whether or not his abandonment of the law, if he ever 
in fact was entitled to the distinction of having practiced law, took 
place about a year before this "Standard" importation essayed to sail 
the political seas of Texas, there is some doubt. On this point, how- 
ever, the following statement from a Gainesville authority is of inter- 
est: "In reference to Bailey selling his law library, I will say that 
he was completely frazzled out as a lawyer before his election to 
Congress. He sold his law library and office furniture about the 
time he ran for Congress, but T could not say whether just before or 
just after. T am inclined to think that he had been selling his law 
books for at least a year before he ran for congress." 



110 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

At any rate, this political free-booter unfurled his flag of politi- 
cal and commercial piracy to the breezes in 1890 and ever after has 
he been a pirate captain upon seas now known on the map of the poli- 
tical world as cesspools of graft and greed. His reign in the South 
until recently, has been as undisputed as his piratical expeditions 
have been bountiful of booty. No southern statesman has dared dur- 
ing all these years to question his hitherto undoubted and universally 
acknowledged supremacy. His conquest has been brilliant and the 
returns from the ocean of oil abundant indeed. Earth and sea and 
sky have done him homage, and his coffers filled with tribute 
plentiful. 

A pity 'tis, 'tis true that, in the very zenith of his fame, when 
fortune was smiling and her choicest favors flowing, a few of his dis- 
gruntled subjects made bold to reproach this august man, for to their 
doom of death and silence were they by his decree o'erwhelmed. 
"Why, man this fellow doth bestride the narrow world like a Collos- 
sus, and we petty men must walk about under his legs or peep about 
to find ourselves in graves, face downward." 

bailey's jealously of BRYAN, 

Washington, July 14, (Galveston News, July 15), 1896. 

"In answer to numerous letters and telegrams from his constitu- 
ents, as to his acceptance or declination of a renomination of him for 
Congress which had been tendered by a primary theretofore held, 
June 6, 1896, Mr. Bailey issued the following address: 

" To the Democrats of the Fifth Congressional District of Texas: 
The National Convention of our party which recently assembled in 
Chicago, has nominated as our candidate for the presidency a gentle- 
man with whom / disagree so v/idely in respect to certain funda- 
mental principles of this government that if he should be chosen 
President, and I should be returned to Congress, my frequent and 
serious disagreements with the administration would be inevitable. 
For the past three years I have been compelled by my sense of duty 
to antagonize the present administration on some important questions 
[Cleveland's Democratic Administration remember, please], and 
having learned the bitterness of such a struggle, I am unwilling to 
place myself in a position where it is certain that a sense of duty no 
less imperative will compel me to antagonize the next administra- 
tion on important questions. I have, therefore, determined to decline 
the nomination. * * * " 

How does the above compare with his recent tirades against those 
who bowed not down while he applied the party lash? True it is that 
Mr. Bailey said further on in his address that he would support 
Bryan privately and sought to explain this inconsistency on his part 
by considerations of party regularity and also, and chiefly, on the 
ground that Bryan was preferable to McKinley regardless of party 
affiliations. 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 111 

Mr. Bailey's objection to Mr. Bryan, whom he opposed at Chi- 
cago, did not go to Mr. Bryan's honesty and integrity, but only to his 
ideas of government. The late objections to Mr. Bailey, in spite of 
his so-called nomination, went to his honesty and integrity. Which 
question is the more vital, and which, if either, would justify opposi- 
tion to a party nominee? 

In an article to the Galveston News of July 17, 1896, under a Fort 
Worth date line, is found the following comments on Mr. Bailey's 
declination to stand for Congress: "There are some here and there, 
however, who entertain the opinion that it is a case of desired solici- 
tation at the hands of his constituents, that his popularity may be 
used in connection with his Senatorial race. Those who think this 
way, say that the young Congressman is following in the footsteps of 
Congressman John Allen of Mississippi some years ago when he de- 
clared that he would not accept the profifered honor at the hands of 
his party, and who, after being nominated, was the victim of the 
following rhyme : 

" 'John Allen said he wouldn't. 
The people said he would ; 
All right, said John the funny, 
On my running bet your money.' " 

This comment by his near neighbors clearly indicates the thought 
on their part that this would-be-Ceasar was "putting aside" the 
profifered congressional attire that he might be later robed in the 
Senatorial toga. 

In opposing Mr. Bryan for temporary chairman at the Chicago 
convention in July, 1896, Bailey referred to the distinguished Ne- 
braskan Democrat as "A populist maverick." 

The following estimate of Mr. Bailey by D. W. Odell, who has 
since acted as such a partisan of Mr. Bailey, and who, after repre- 
senting the latter before the suppression committee of 1907, became 
employed in the Waters Pierce Oil Company litigation at Austin, 
having conferred with Bailey and Pierce at the Waldorf-Astoria in 
New York shortly after Bailey's so-called exoneration and before the 
trial at Austin in May, 1907, is very interesting. It indicates Odell's 
estimate of Bailey at that time. He was evidently unbiased then and 
spoke the truth with discernment. Mr. Odell's expressions follow: 

"ODELL WAS SHOCKED." 

D.ALLAS, Texas, July 18, 1896. 
"Hon D. W. Odell of Cleburne, [the same Odell that shielded 
Bailey before the late Suppression Committee], late district 
delegate to the Chicago Convention, was in the city last night. 
He said to the News reporter: 'I never was more surprised 
than when I read the declination of Congressman J. W. Bailey to 
make the race for Congress in his district again. Just before leavmg 



112 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

Chicago I had a long talk with Mr. Bailey on the question he outlines 
in his letter to the News. He told me then that he differed with Mr. 
Bryan on fundamental principles of government; that he had found 
such differences to be unpleasant by experience with the present ad- 
ministration, etc. He talked then of refusing to run for Congress 
for these reasons. The more he tried to explain, the more confused 
I became at the real cause of his actions, and the more impressed at 
what seemed a lack of sincerity. I got a half a promise from him, or 
thought I had, that he would take no decisive step until he had re- 
turned home and consulted with his friends. For this reason, if for 
no other, I was surprised to read what he had concluded to do. // 
seemed to be the general impression at Chicago that feelings of pique 
or of jealousy, raged in Mr. Bailey's breast. I do not know that this 
is true, but his course is very mystifying.' " (Galveston News, July 
i8, 1896.) 

"Great guns!" What treason this to the unmatched and matchless 
gladiator, and that too, from such a source! Our Ceasar was evi- 
dently pining for the "crown of thorns and cross of gold" so recently 
bestowed on another. 

OTHER COMMENT ON BAILEY'S POUTING. 

E. L. Woods : Said he was in Washington when Bailey made his 
maiden speech which attracted much attention. Then Bryan came 
and "completely eclipsed Bailey's effort and the latter is sore in con- 
sequence. The only grievance he has against Bryan is of a purely 
personal nature. * * * If he has withdrawn, as reported, from 
his race for Congress from his district, it is only to be able to 
strengthen himself for the race to fill old Roger Q. Mill's seat in the 
Senate. No, Bailey is not going to forsake public life nor release his 
grip upon the public 'pap.' " 

M. A. Posten : "Bailey is slick and there is likely to be method in 
his madness." 

E. M. Reardon: "His story is very weak. There is nothing in it." 
H. G. Robertson: "Bailey has made a donkey out of himself." 
Judge C. M. Tucker: "Jealousy of Bryan. * * * He should 
be consistent, however, and if Bryan, in his opinion, is an unsafe man, 
decline to support him." 

All from Galveston News, July 18, 1896. 

Gainesville, Texas, July 18, 1896. 

MR. bailey returns HOME, AND IS PRESSED INTO MAKING A SPEECH 

CONCERNING HIS DECLINATION WHICH WAS CONCLUDED IN 

THESE WORDS: 

"I would not be truthful if I said that I would not accept this 
nomination if the Convention shall see fit to tender it to me." And 
thus was concluded his brief retirement from public life, lasting from 
July 14 to July 18, 1896. Thus suddenly came to grief the lately be- 



The Political 'Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 113 

Stirred congressional aspirations of a dozen or more candidates, that 
had come forth in those few short days, ready to take his place. 

What a pity that he did not then in fact retire forever from the 
public service which he has since covered with shame and disgrace to 
Texas. 

BAILEY STILL OPPOSED TO BRYAN IN 1908. 

THE ABSENT GUEST — SENATOR BAILEY FAILED TO SHOW UP AT BRYAN 

DINNER. 

By Associated Press. 

Washington, Jan. 28, 1908. — Senator Newlands of Nevada gave 
a dinner last night in honor of William J. Bryan, who is a guest of 
the Senator at Woodely, his country residence. Those invited to the 
dinner were one-half of the democratic members of the Senate ac- 
cording to the alphabetical arrangement of names in the congres- 
sional directory. 

Senator Newlands has arranged for a similar dinner this evening 
when the other half of the democratic senators will be invited. 

The invited guests last night were William J. Bryan, Senators 
Bacon, Bailey, Bankhead, Clarke, Clay, Culberson, Daniel, Jefifer- 
son Davis, Foster, Frazier, Johnson, Latimer and McCreary. 

Senator Bailey of Texas was not present. 

BAILEY ALWAYS AGAINST BRYAN. 

On this very day, February 15, 1908, the Democratic primaries 
throughout Oklahoma instructed their forthcoming delegates to the 
National Convention to support William J. Bryan for the Demo- 
cratic presidential nomination. This was unanimous. Attention is 
called to Mr. Bailey's long opposition to Mr. Bryan and to the fact 
that he dramatically left the audience when Bryan was speaking in 
New York after his return from his world-tour. It is interesting to 
recall in this connection also that John H. Kirby in an interview in 
St. Louis in the fall of 1907 remarked that he would support a Re- 
publican for president in preference to William J. Bryan, should the 
latter be nominated by the Democrats. 

BRYANISM VS. BAILEYISM. 

All this is not surprising. Bryanism means equality of oppor- 
tunity in the economic as well as in the political world; Baileyism 
means private ownership not only of private property, but of public 
utilities and monopolies that public men may graft, graft, graft, and 
a plutocracy of wealth be builded up, while the masses sink lower and 
lower in the scale of economic existence. Bryanism endorses that 
old injunction "Thou shalt not steal;" Baileyism proclaims that pub- 
lic offices shall be prostituted to private graft, in the name and under 
the guise of Democracy. Bryanism stands as a great moral force; 
Baileyism means corruption. Bryanism teaches that they who would 



114 Senator J. W. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

be rich fall into temptation; Baileyism "despises those public men 
who think it necessary to remain poor in order to be considered hon- 
est." Bryanism proclaims that corrupt wealth is a disgrace to its 
possessor; Baileyism declares that the cry of the poor and needy, the 
helpless and the oppressed, should go unheeded. Bryanism stands 
for honesty in public and private transactions; Baileyism stands for 
dishonesty and corruption from the lowest to the highest. Bryanism 
reiterates that the love of money is the root of all evil; Baileyism 
stands for lust of gold and greed of power. Bryanism inculcates the 
doctrine that love of country and fair dealing with our fellow men is 
the patriot's first duty and highest reward; Baileyism advocates sel- 
fishness, self-love, self-praise and self-seeking as the chief objects of 
existence. Bryanism extolls manhood ; Baileyism worships mammon. 
Bryanism means patriotism; Baileyism spells traitorism. 

BAILEY AFRAID OF THE PEOPLE. 

Is it any wonder then that the so-called Democratic Executive 
Committee of Texas, packed as it has been for the last two years with 
Bailey partisans, should, on this self same day, February 15, 1908, 
while Oklahoma was instructing for Bryan, have refused to give die 
Democracy of Texas an opportunity to vote by primary election 
upon Bailey's candidacy for delegate at large from Texas to the 
forthcoming Denver Convention? If Bailey and his partisans are 
not afraid of the people why are they not willing to trust the people? 

The National Democratic Convention at Kansas City, the first 
days of July, 1900, promulgated a Democratic platform in which is 
to be found the following plank: 

"IFe pledge the Democratic party to an unceasing 'warfare in 
nation, State and City against private monopoly in every form. Exist- 
ing laics against trusts must be enforced and more stringent ones must 
be enacted." 

At that very time Senator Bailey was in league with the Oil 
Masters, having already received $4,800 ($3,300 April 25th and 
$1,500 June 13, 1900) from H. Clay Pierce and now he asks not the 
people of Texas, but the politicians, to elect him as a delegate to the 
Denver Convention in 1908. Verily the state to which Bailey would 
bring the Democratic party is inconsistent indeed. 

BRYAN ON POLITICAL ETHICS. 

The following sentiments from William J. Bryan are in marked 
contrast to the principles and practices of J. W. Bailey: "If one is 
willing to become a grafter he can make money out of politics. Every 
Senator can become rich if he will only sell his soul. The first lesson 
for the official to learn is that no man can serve two masters. A man 
is lacking in either intelligence or honesty, or both, who defends the 
acceptance of employment from those whose interests which are 
adverse to the interests of the public. 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 115 

"The time is ripe for a consideration of ethical questions. There 
is a moral awakening throughout the land and people are learning 
that there is something more important than the making of money. 
Business men, instead of chasing the almighty dollar until they fall 
exhausted into the grave, are going to set a limit to their accumula- 
tions, and, having secured enough to supply their needs, give to soci- 
ety the benefit of their business ability and experience. This moral 
wave will not expend itself until dishonesty has been driven from 
business, corruption from politics and injustice from government." 

Bailey's opposition to Mr. Bryan dates from Bryan's first appear- 
ance in Congress, in the early nineties, and seems to have had its origin 
in Bailey's jealousy of Mr. Bryan's superior oratorical ability, quali- 
ties of leadership, and popularity. Bailey has not only persistently 
opposed Mr. Bryan since the Chicago Convention of 1896, but op- 
posed Mr. Bryan's selection as the temporary Chairman of that As- 
sembly and afterwards referred to this splendid Statesman and far- 
sighted patriot as "The Populist Maverick of the West." 



116 Senator J. W. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

CHAPTER VIII. 
BAILEY, THE BELLIGERENT. 

Throughout his entire life, beginning with his early role as a bar- 
room bully, J. Edward (alias Weldon) Bailey has displayed the de- 
spicable characteristics of the boss, the braggart and the blackguard. 
So overweening has been and now is the vanity and vainglory of this 
egomaniac as to cause him apparently to lose all self poise and bal- 
ance. When argument has failed him, he has invariably resorted to 
that last argument of the guilty, personal abuse and vituperation. 

At times in his life he has even descended to the low level of the 
bestial by the exercise, or cheap display, of brute force — always, how- 
ever, under circumstances that insured his own complete immunity 
from harm. Note his remark to one of the witnesses of the Missis- 
sippi bulldozing campaign when "Captain" Joe said: "We propose 
to have these offices if we have to kill out all the Independents to get 
them." 

bailey's brilliant assault on a helpless paralytic. 

In this connection it is quite interesting to note the following 
scathing letter from Hon. W. O. Davis, a highly respected attorney 
and long time resident of Gainesville, Texas, addressed to Mr. Bailey 
through the public press. Mr. Davis had been on the witness stand 
before the suppression committee of 1907 a few days before, and 
when Bailey took the stand to make his three days' stump speech, as 
might have been expected of him, he made a bitter thrust at Mr. 
Davis, and referred to the latter as having, while on the witness 
stand, "hung his head like a dog." Mr. Davis' reply to this unkind 
remark was as follows: 

"Hon. Joseph W. Bailey, 

"Gainesville, Texas. Feb. 23, 1907. 
"Dear Senator: — I notice from the News that in your harangue 
before the investigation committee you say that I hung my head like 
a dog. I plead guilty to not carrying a high head. I have never con- 
sidered a high head becoming to me. I have not owned race horses 
in partnership with Gates, Francis or Sibley. I have no rooms at the 
Waldorf-Astoria; no credit with Pierce, Yoakum or Kirby. My 
name is not upon the books of the oil companies or written in their 
secret code. I had no rich uncle or aunt, and did not lose their prop- 
erty intrusted to me for investment. My achievements, unlike yours, 
have been humble, and I am justified In carrying nothing but a lowly 
head. A high head does not always Indicate an honest heart or a clear 
conscience. Macaulay says that Titus Gates carried the highest head 




HON. CHAS. H. JEXKINS 
Brownwood, Texas. 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 117 

in all England. He steadfastly gazed into the faces of the court, 
jurors and bystanders, and cried, "Persecution." Had he been al- 
lowed to select his jury, he would, no doubt, have escaped the pillory. 
I appeal to history, not to compare you with Titus Oates, but to show 
ihat too much reliance should not be placed in a high head or a brazen 
face. I am not insulted at your saying that 1 look like a dog. The 
dog is a faithful animal, and has never been known to run with the 
wolves when detailed to guard the sheep. You have never been called 
a watch dog. 1 do not write to discuss this, but to call your attention 
to some grave errors in your harangue. 

"You said that Mr. Green, after you had sold him the mortgaged 
land, bought it under the mortgage for much less than its value, and 
then sued you on your warranty. Now, Mr. Green did not buy the 
land under the mortgage, and had no interest in it after the sale. He 
lost all he paid you on the land. This is not the only error I find. 
You paid a glowing tribute to the memory of Judge Barrett, and said 
that he wrote your vindication into the judgment, and in efifect re- 
buked Green for alleging misrepresentation. You know, or should 
know, that Judge Barrett did not write, read or see that judgment. 
I wrote the judgment at the request of your attorneys. No proof was 
made before Judge Barrett. Now, why do you pose before the com- 
mittee and seek to create the impression that the judge heard the evi- 
dence; that Green broke down in his proof, and that Judge Barrett 
wrote with his own hand your vindication? There is another thing 
I will call your attention to while upon the subject. In the summer 
or fall of 1894 Mr. Green showed me a telegram which he had just 
received from you, asking him to wire that the judgment had been 
paid. The telegram was sent by you from Whitesboro to Mr. Green 
at Fort Worth. I understand you carried a high head at Whitesboro. 
denounced your opponent, Parson Browder, as a slanderer, and as- 
serted you had paid this judgment in full. If you did so, you told that 
which was not true, asked a citizen to corroborate you, and denounced 
a preacher as a slanderer who had told the truth. 

"When I think of you as my senator I have cause, aside from my 
humble achievements, for carrying a low head. You pay a tribute to 
the memory of J. W. Phillips, and say that in his lifetime I would 
not have dared accuse you of drawing on him for part of his compen- 
sation as clerk. I have never professed much courage, moral or 
physical. I have lived in Texas for more than 35 years, and have 
never whipped any one, not even a child. You have been here for 
more than 20 years, and have never whipped any one except a para- 
lytic on crutches. * * * You will see that my record for courage 
is at least as good as yours, and that neither has enough to justify 
boasting. 

"While living is as cheap as it is in the Indian Territory, no one 
ought to be allowed to make as much as twenty-five thousand dollars 
per annum for clerical work. [As Bailey while on the Judiciary 



118 Senator J. W. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

Committee arranged for J. W. Phillips to do.] All above a reason- 
able compensation should go to the government. Excessive compen- 
sation gives rise to jobbery. * * * In your harangue you took 
occasion to abuse all who dared criticise you. Do you know that a 
fight is on between the people and the trusts? Are you not aware 
that there is a belief among the people that the trusts control some 
powerful United States Senators, and, through them, the government? 
Are you so puffed up as to believe that the people will not dare criti- 
cise a senator who has run with the crowd that you run with, and who 
obtains his wealth from the sources you obtain yours? My only sur- 
prise is that any one should attempt to defend you. If I am not con- 
trolled by prejudice — and I try not to be — some of the good people 
of Texas are as clearly deluded as the followers of Joseph Smith and 
Alexander Dowie. You say that your name and the name of Texas 
are inseparably connected, and to criticise you is to criticise Texas. 
You say you have made Texas famous. If you should die and the his- 
tory of Texas should be written to date, what have you done that 
would be recorded? You secured the readmission of the Waters 
Pierce Oil Company. You imposed upon the attorney-general the 
false doctrine that a corporation could by a colorable dissolution and 
reorganization avoid a judgment. What else have you done except 
blow your horn and carry a high head? You conclude your harangue 
by threatening to appeal to a shotgun in order to silence your critics. 
It is a bad cause that appeals to the shotgun. The shotgun may 
silence, but it will never convince. You did not run with Pierce, 
Gates and the oil trust before your election to the senate. // is your 
political pull and influence they are after. If you were a private 
citizen you would not be worth a dollar to them. You are, or should 
be, a servant of the people. They have a right to know your associa- 
tions and your connections with trust influences. When they seek to 
know, you threaten with a shotgun. Unterrified by threats, I contend 
that Texas has no need of a political boss such as you endeavor to be. 
The people are tired of your abuse. They are tired of your fulsome 
praise of yourself, and of your intemperate abuse of your critics. 
They would like to have a senator who does not miss connections at 
St. Louis, have rooms at the Waldorf-Astoria, hang around No. 26 
Broadway, and borrow money from millionaires who are not in the 
money lending business. They are reaching the conclusion that fast 
horses, confidential trust relations and statesmanship do not go well 
together." 

BAILEY THREATENS TO BRAVELY CUT THE THROAT OF PARSON BROWDER. 

During the campaign for congress in the old Fifth District in the 
fall of 1894, Reverend U. M. Browder actually had the temerity to 
offer as a candidate for congress against his Royal Highness, since 
familiarly known in Standard Oil parlance as "Senator Republish," 
and in other circles as "Coal Oil Joe." Just why the Reverend Mr. 
Browder should have been so presumptious as to undertake to exercise 



The Political Life-Story of a Pallcn Idol 119 

his constitutional right to seek an ofRce at the hands of his country- 
men, to which Joe was entitled by virtue of "The divine right of 
kings," is one of the inscrutable mysteries that have surrounded this 
unapproachable Colossus, sometimes styled "the greatest living Dem- 
ocrat." 

Observe with scrutiny the following contemporaneous history of 
those memorable times : 

"Sherman, Texas, Oct. i, 1894. 

"Since Bailey's return from Washington, the campaign has been 
quite warm and the joint debates between the two candidates [Bully 
Bailey and Parson Browder] at times reached the danger line and 
trouble was expected. Personalities of the bitterest nature have been 
freely indulged in until Saturday night at Denison a passage at arms 
was barely averted. * * * The explanation issued by the popu- 
lists is that on account of threats of serious bodily harm made against 
[Browder] by Bailey in Denison, // ^vas best to end the joint debates 
and let each man canvass on his own hook." — Galveston News, Octo- 
ber 2, 1894. 

Denton, Texas, Oct. 2, 1894. 

"Rev. U. M. Browder spoke here tonight. * * * He ex- 
plained the reason of his being alone; stated that Mr. Bailey had 
rushed at him with a knife and threatened to cut his throat at Deni- 
son." — Fort Worth Gazette, Oct. 3, 1894. 

Denison, Texas, Oct. 6, 1894. 

"Congressman J. W. Bailey was asked about the assassination 
story which was sprung in Sherman. Mr. Bailey emphatically stated 
he would not be interviewed for a Denison paper [where the knife 
and throat cutting incident occurred] . 'You may say that or nothing,' 
said the irate Congressman." — Fort Worth Gazette, Oct. 7, 1894. 

And thus did the great and promising statesman from Texas, in 
the might of his matchless manipulations, clear the field of all com- 
petitors and proudly strut forth from year to year as the unconquera- 
ble hero of many hard fought battles. 

So great indeed was the intrepidity of this valorous knight as to 
cause his lordship to valiantly attack on the floor of the senate, some 
years later, the diminutive Senator Beveridge from Indiana. Just 
how or why this latter specimen of his race was not devoured in toto 
by the raving lion of southern jungles was due perhaps to senatorial 
decorum. This latter consideration would prevent perchance a fur- 
ther exhibition of pugilistic prowess than merely to cudgel, choke or 
pinch the ears of the small, though brilliant Beveridge. Then, too, 
perhaps, generous Joe would not so unkindly seem as to utterly de- 
stroy and exterminate a man so far his inferior in all the attributes, 
not only of body, but of mind and heart. Proud indeed, should all 
Texans be that their great Senator should such polite and generous 
conduct show. Especially is this true when we reflect that Joe has 
said — and neither his judgment nor his veracity ever were at fault — 

I— 10 



120 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

that all Republicans were dishonest men, unworthy of belief, con- 
sideration, or of charity, because they from our lord and master 
make bold to differ. 

"joe" and "teddy." 

In the spring of 1906 Mr. Bailey became very angry, while Con- 
gress was in session, at a suggestion that he "was suspected of holding 
secret conferences with Mr. Aldrich himself, and by skillful support 
of his anti-injunction amendment, Mr. Bailey had intentionally split 
up the Democratic caucus and Mr. Tillman could not deliver any- 
thing like a unanimous Democratic vote." So belligerent did the 
irate Senator become as to charge President Roosevelt with member- 
ship in the Ananias club. "I denounce the publication," declared 
the bellicose Senator from Texas, "as an unqualified, deliberate and 
malicious lie. I denounce that correspondent as an unqualified, de- 
liberate, malicious liar, whoever he may be, and whatever the office 
he holds." 

Intemperate and vehement denunciation is usually an evidence 
of a lame cause and of weakness, not of strength, in the man who 
makes use of superlatives. The belligerent Senator from Texas is no 
exception to this rule. 

PROPOSES TO DRIVE HIS ENEMIES INTO THE SEA. 

When the voucher disclosures were made in November, 1906, 
during the course of the Waters-Pierce oil litigation in Texas, show- 
ing Bailey's real connection with that trust, and the fact that he had 
received large monetary compensation from them was made known, 
Mr. Bailey became extremely indignant and announced from Wash- 
ington his proposed return to Texas and promised his idolators that 
it would require only two days for him to put the "Hessians" to rout 
and drive all his "enemies" into the Gulf of Mexico. The only regret 
that he has ever expressed for this proposed immersion, was occa- 
sioned by the fact that he hated to "pollute" the waters of the historic 
Gulf. 

While the agitation leading up to the investigation by a commit- 
tee of the Thirtieth Legislature, 1907, was on, Mr. Bailey would send 
out for members of the Legislature and employ every promise of 
reward and every threat of punishment, that his lordship could con- 
ceive, as a whip to force first, his re-election, and second, his white- 
wash. Especially were these tactics employed with the younger mem- 
bers of the Legislature, most of whom, it is thought, were promised 
congressional honors at the hands of Boss Bailey. 

BAILEY AND HIS "GUN." 

San Antonio, Texas, (San Antonio Express), 

December 1 1;, 1906. 
Mr. Bailey was in the city todav, the guest of his friend, Col. Jot 
Gunter. Only one member of the Bexar County Legislative delcga- 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 121 

tion, J. F. Onion, called on him, Mr. T. D. Cobbs being out of the 
city. Senator Green and Representative Win. A. Cocke, although 
in their offices, did not call, though IMr. Cocke was urged to do so by 
a number of Mr. Bailey's partisan supporters. 

All day reception was held in Col. Gunter's office, but less than an 
hundred citizens out of a voting population of 1 2,000 to 1 5,000 called. 
Some of his callers expressed fear for his personal safety and said 
they had expected to hear of a personal encounter between him and 
his "enemies." 

CARRIES "gun" in SATCHEL. 

"I have always expected it myself," said Senator Bailey. "While 
I never carry a pistol in my pocket, I always carry one in my hand 
satchel. A few nights ago, while riding on a train, two men pur- 
posely sat in a scat next to me and began to make remarks about me. 
I removed the pistol from my satchel and placed it in my pocket. 
There were no more remarks made about me on that occasion." 

POLITICAL EXTERMINATOR. 

Hon. S. E. Johnson, a member of the lower House, testified before 
the Committee (Committee Report, 1907, pages 379-380) that he was 
many times importuned by a Bailey member of the House "to go 
down and see the Senator." Mr. Johnson testified in part: "He, 
Bailey, said that he would see that the people who would oppose him 
for re-election ivould never hold another public office in the State; 
that he had a little money left, and he said, thank God, he had the 
right of free speech and he would see that these men who opposed 
him in this race would never hold another office. * * * He went 
on to state that this Duncan resolution icas not the kind of ijivcsti^a- 
tion he wanted. * * * He was going to see that the men who 
opposed him in this investigation never hold another public office in 
this State." 

ABUSES HIS OPPONENTS. 

Hon. J. D. Cox, of Rockwall County, was asked to call on Mr. 
Bailey at the Driskil Hotel and in his testimony before the Commit- 
tee (1907, pages 384-385) said: "He [Bailey] used about as vile 
language as a man can use in regard to it." Witness then gave some 
of the language employed by Mr. Bailey, which is so low and vile as 
to make it improper to be reproduced in this volume. The language, 
however, can be found near the bottom of the second column of the 
Bailey Investigation Committee's Report (1907), page 384. Mr. 
Bailey threatened to go into the districts of those who were claiming, 
on behalf of the people, the right to investigate his conduct while 
their Senator, and defeat all such for election to any office within the 
gift of the people. 

Bailey, the immaculate, in a speech to the Thirtieth Legislature, 
immediately following his re-election January 23rd, 1907, (Dallas 



122 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

News, January 24, 1907), among other bitter and boastful things, 
said: "In all the long and glorious history of our own and of other 
Southern States, there never lived and served a man ivhose record is 
as much above suspicion of unselfish men as mine. * * * They 
have never been able to discover even one luistake. Is it not marvel- 
ous that in a State like ours a man whose record is as stainless as mine 
has always been, can be pursued as they have pursued me? * * * 
My name is indissolubly connected with the name of the State 'of 
Texas." 

"I do not apologize for anything I have done. I ask no quarter. 
I cry not for peace. I am for war. Let it be war to the knife and 
knife to the hilt, and I exclaim, 'Lay on Macdufif, and curst be he who 
first cries hold, enough!'" Thus declared this apostle of strife, at 
Cleburne, Texas. October 15th, 1906, (Galveston News, October 16, 
1906). 

MR. bailey's parting DEFI TO THE 30TH LEGISLATURE OF TEXAS. 

On February 27th, (Dallas News, February 28, 1907), the night 
of his dishonor, but by his partisans referred to as his "exoneration," 
after the Texas Legislature had whitewashed him, without waiting 
to receive the testimony and without permitting debate, Mr. Bailey, 
rampant and raging, gave expression to many violent, vindictive and 
bitter remarks, among them the following: 

"I had intended at the end of this Senatorial term to retire, 
* * * but the war these infidels have waged on me has changed 
my purpose, and I never intend to retire until all of them are safely 
buried, politically speaking. However, I do not care to retire when 
they are buried, because if I did I would have to retire at the expira- 
tion of the next year. They have made their own graves. We are 
going to lay them away in those newly made graves. We are going 
to bury them face down, so that the harder they scratch to get out, the 
deeper they will go toward their eternal resting place. 

"Mark my words, not one of the men who organized and sought 
to accomplish this conspiracy will ever again wear the honors of 
Texas Democracy. * * * ^Vo/ an honest drop of blood courses 
in their veins. They say this is a bitter speech. I intend it to be bitter. 
If I might borrow a sentiment from the great infidel, Robert G. 
IngersoU, I would say that I sometimes wish that I might possess 
words of pure hate, words that would writhe and hiss like snakes, for 
only then could I express my opinion of the men who organized and 
conducted this conspiracy. * * * 

"If I live not one of their kind will ever again disgrace the State 
of Texas by holding an office under its authority. * * * In my 
home I intend to put the photograph of this legislature. Two pic- 
tures will embrace that photograph. Over the one I am going to 
write "The Roll of Honor," and over the other, I am going to write 
"The Rogues Gallery." * * * I atn going to swear my children 
never to forget the one, or forgive the other." 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 123 

BAILEY AS OTHERS SEE HIM AT WASHINGTON. 

That the people of Washington and especially those having inti- 
mate knowledge of congressional affairs, fully understand and depre- 
cate Mr. Bailey's real character and duplicitous conduct, is clearly 
illustrated by the following pungent letter, written to the author from 
Washington on the 12th day of January, 1907, while the fight for an 
investigation of Mr. Bailey's conduct was in progress at Austin. The 
letter speaks for itself and is worthy of incorporation here: 

"I have read with a great deal of interest and satisfaction your 
address of January 2, as reported in the Galveston Daily News. For 
twenty years I have been an employee of the House of Representa- 
tives here at Washington, and as such have an opportunity to note and 
study public men. Some are great, and some are so-called great, 
joe Bailey is a "so-called" in every sense of the word. As so-called 
leader of the minority in the 55th and 56th Congress he was a great 
success,— for the Republicans. For his party, however, he was a flat 
failure. To people right here on the ground, Bailey is the nine, ten. 
Jack, Queen, and Deuce. Joseph is a short straight all the time, but 
tries to bluff the populace that he has the King, — in fact that he is the 
King himself. Joseph can no more be straight than the above men- 
tioned poker hand can be, for he's short the requisite. 

BAILEY-ALDRICH AND THE RATE BILL. 
"I do not know whether much stress is being laid upon Bailey's 
blufif in the matter of the Railroad Rate bill in the Senate, or not. If 
not, it certainlv should be freely aired. When honest and rare old 
Ben Tillman was put in charge of the Rate bill by Senator Aldrich, 
the Democratic party was placed in a position to solidify itself and 
make more political capital than in any ten previous years taken to- 
gether. Tillman and other honest Democrats recognized this, and 
they all thought that Joseph had caught the King and would be in at 
the show-down. But Aldrich, the representative of the Standard Oil 
knew his own. Good old Ben Tillman, scenting the battle, shook his 
mane, lowered his head, elevated his tail and charged the enemy. 
Before reaching the enemy, however, he rushed into a cloud of Con- 
stitutional dust that Bailey had kicked up, and when old Bull Ben 
emerged he looked like Wade's Kansas pup after coming in contact 
with the cyclone, viz : he was upside down and wrong side out. The 
country, at the time, applauded Joseph for his well balanced defense 
of the Great Constitution, and I presume the IVaters-Pierce people 
remitted the interest on his notes. The country in general thought 
that good old "one-lamp" Tillman had made a mess of it, Aldrich 
blandly smiled, and Joseph strode forth from the Senate with immac- 
ulate shirt front, a mighty man. 

BAILEY AND STANDARD OIL. 

"The Standard Oil practically controls the railroad systems of 
the country. Texas has within her borders more milfes of railroad 



124 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

(consequently more Standard Oil influence) than any other State in 
the Union. Aldrich represents the Standard Oil in the Senate. Bailey 
balled up the rate bill under the cloak of the Constitution which he 
professes to love so well. Why, the work is so coarse it has slivers at 
the joints. 

"Will the Standard Oil be able to buy Texas? It needs Bailey, 
not for Texas, but to befog and befuddle the game on the Democratic 
side. Fancy Aldrich, the leader on the Republican side of the Sen- 
ate, and Bailey the leader on the Democratic side. It would really 
be like taking candy from the baby. Will Texas aid in this damnable 
business, or will she rise to the occasion? 

"Bailey's course in the Senate undoubtedly explains the reason for 
his leading his party into strange and devious paths, under the same 
old cloak of the same old 'Dear Constitoooo-shin' (as he calls it) 
when he attempted to be leader of the minority in the House. 

"Would to Almighty God that your Legislature was composed 
of men of the stufif that courses in your veins." 

FAMOUS CRAWFORD CIRCULAR. 

To the Citizens of Dallas, Texas: — In a speech which I delivered 
at Waxahachie on September 21, 1907, reviewing Joe Bailey's record 
as a Senator, I stated among other things, that: "Bailey never has, 
never can and never will fairly and honestly discuss the facts in this 
case. No advocate and no apologist of Bailey can ever do it. Fairly 
considered, his record is wholly indefensible." 

Joe Bailey made a speech at Abilene on yesterday. In that speech 
he did not attempt to discuss the facts in the case. He did, however, 
state: "Bill Crawford has suborned more men to perjury than any 
other ten lawyers that now practice in the State of Texas." I have 
never suborned any man in my life, and I denounce Joe Bailey as a 
liar, a bribe-taking scoundrel and a coward. 

W. L. Crawford, 
Dallas, Texas, October 26, 1907. 

To this Bailey has never replied, nor has he ever mentioned Craw- 
ford's name in public again, though one of his satellites from Hous- 
ton was afterwards fined $100 for a pistol play in Dallas in connection 
therewith. Indeed the following dispatch refers to that verv matter. 

JUDGE FINED FOR CARRYING A REVOLVER. 

(Special Dispatch to the San Antonio Gazette.) 
Dallas, February 26, 1908. — Judge William Masterson, a Bailey 
member of the State Democratic Executive Committee, pleaded 
guilty in the county court today to the charge of carrying a pistol at 
the time of the Bailey-Crawford afifair in this city. He was fined 
$100. When arrested last fall he was accompanied by a senator. 
[Bailey.] 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 125 



ANTIDOTES FOR BAILEYISM. 



No man, however praised or abused, and no set of men, however 
brilliant or depraved, can control the ultimate destinies of an en- 
lightened people. — The Author. 

It is great and manly to disdain disguise; it shows our spirit, and 
proves our strength. — Young. 

When clouds are seen wise men put on their cloaks. — Shakespeare. 

Trust not him that hath once broken faith; he who betrayed thee 
once, will betray thee again. — Shakespeare. 

The noblest contribution which any man can make for the benefit 
of posterity, is that of a good character. The richest bequest which 
any man can leave to the youth of his native land, is that of a shining, 
spotless example. — R. C. PVinthrop. 

Principles are everything; "the eternal years of God" are theirs. — 
The Author. 

Let us not say. Every man is the architect of his own fortune; but 
let us say. Every man is the architect of his own character. — G. D. 
Boardman. 

A fair reputation is a plant of delicate nature, and by no means 
rapid in its growth. It will not shoot up, like the gourd of the 
prophet, in a single night, but like that gourd in a single night it may 
perish. — J . Hawes. 

Experience serves to prove, that the worth and strength of a state 
depend far less upon the form of its institutions than upon the char- 
acter of its men; for the nation is only the aggregate of individual 
conditions, and civilization itself is but a question of personal im- 
provement. — S. Smiles. 

A good name is rather to be chosen than great riches, and loving 
favor rather than silver and gold. — Solomon. 

If beneficent principles and civic righteousness triumph not in 
the end, human government is a failure, and the destiny of the race 
as unimportant and ephemeral as the fleeting phantoms of a fading 
dream. — The Author. 

Character is built out of circumstances. From exactly the same 
materials one man builds palaces, while another builds hovels.— 
G. H. Lewes. 



126 Senator J. JV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

Never does a man portray his own character more vividly, than 
in his manner of portraying another. — Richter. 

If you would civilize a man, begin with his grandmother. — Victor 
Hugo. 

Conceit is the most contemptible, and one of the most odious quali- 
ties in the world. It is vanity driven from all other shifts, and forced 
to appear to itself for admiration. — Hazlitt. 

Purity in politics, like purity everywhere, ought to be the rule. — 
The Author. 

It is wonderful how near conceit is to insanity! — Jerrold. 

He who gives himself airs of importance, exhibits the credentials 
of impotence. — Lavater. 

The overweening self-respect of conceited men relieves others 
from the duty of respecting them at all. — H. JV. Beecher. 

It is the admirer of himself, and not the admirer of virtue, that 
thinks himself superior to others. — Plutarch. 

Conceit may pufif a man up, but can never prop him up. — Raskin. 

We uniformly think too well of ourselves. But self-conceit is 
specially the mark of a small and narrow mind. Great and noble 
natures are most free from it. 

A man should never be ashamed to own he has been in the wrong, 
which is but saying, in other words, that he is wiser to-day than he 
was yesterday. — Pope. 

Why does no man confess his vices? Because he is yet in them. 
It is for a waking man to tell his dream. — Seneca. 

Let us indulge the optimism of hope rather than the pessimism 
of despair. — The Author. 




STAXDARD OIL GIANT. 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 127 



CHAPTER IX. 

STANDARD OIL MANEUVERS IN TEXAS AND BAILEY'S 
FIRST INVESTIGATION (SUPPRESSION) 1900-1901. 

By the winter of 1899- 1900 the Standard Oil trust, through the 
Waters-Pierce Oil Company as its Southwestern branch, had been 
all but driven from the State of Texas. It had fought for an oppor- 
tunity to continue to plunder the people of Texas, but the United 
States Supreme Court had affirmed the decree of ouster and an appeal 
lay only to the tribunal of political influence. The then supposedly 
brilliant and brainy Bailey was the presiding political genius in Texas 
at that juncture. He had been ten years in Congress and was then 
prospective Democratic nominee for the U. S. Senate. 

Honorable Thomas S. Smith, Bailey's close friend, then attorney- 
general of Texas, testified before the Bailey Investigation Commit- 
tee of 1901 (House Journal, pp. 164-166, Twenty-Seventh Legisla- 
ture) : "I told him [J. D. Johnson, general attorney for the Waters- 
Pierce Oil Company] in the fall of 1899 that under no circumstances 
would they be permitted to enter Texas pending that appeal [to the 
United States Supreme Court]. * * * Under no circumstances 
would we give him a permit to do business in Texas. * * * After 
the Court affirmed the case in March, 1900, the attorneys came to me 
to see about giving them time. * * * j told the attorneys that I 
would give them a reasonable length of time. They submitted differ- 
ent propositions to continue business on their old charter. I consid- 
ered that the judgment of that Court was perpetual. They wanted 
to pay penalties and suggested fabulous suins. I told them I would 
not consider money; that money was no object to Texas where prin- 
ciple was involved. That was all I had to say to them. Just about 
the time of the second visit [to Texas of Mr. Pierce and his lawyers] 
some one stated, 'your friend Bailey is in town.' * * * He said: 
'What are you going to do about this Waters-Pierce Oil business?' 
I told him that 1 had come to the conclusion that they could not do 
business in this State. He said: 'If you think they could do business 
legally, on account of a friend [not, of course, on account of the 
thirty-three hundred dollars that he had in his pocket from Pierce], 
I would be glad for them to be permitted.' * * * Just after he 
left, Mr. Pierce, Judge Clark and Mr. Johnson made another visit. 
They came to talk again. We decided nothing but came out just 
where we went in; that was during the first part of May. * * * 
Finally the Waters-Pierce oil people wrote me and wanted me to sug- 
gest some method whereby they could do business. All I could say 
was: 'You cannot do business in Texas under your old charter.' 
* * * I gave them until the 31st day of May, after which the 



128 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

mandate would issue and the process would be served. * * * 
They came with a new charter. * * * I was surprised to see that 
it had the same name as the old company. IVe were very much put 
out. 

BAILEY UNEXPECTEDLY RETURNS TO TEXAS. 

Austin, Texas, May i, 1900. 
"His [Bailey's] coming has created more or less surprise, and 
when it is known through the State, will likely create much comment 
as he left the city only a short time ago, and upon reaching Washing- 
ton immediately retraced his steps to Texas. Mr. Bailey refuses to 
make any statement for publication. * * * He said to the News 
correspondent that he had not made any engagements to speak and 
that he did not know how long he would remain in Texas." — Gal- 
veston News, May 2, 1900. 

bailey's return to TEXAS SURPRISE AT WASHINGTON. 

Washington, May 2, 1900. 

"The announcement that Representative Bailey had turned up in 
Austin to investigate a rumored plan of the Democrats to insert an 
anti-expansion plank in the Texas Platform, was read with much sur- 
prise. Mr. Bailey has been expected for ten days or more, and his 
friends have been preparing a reception for him. It was learned 
several days ago that he had stopped off in Kentucky on business and 
his arrival has been daily expected." — Galveston News, May 3, 1900. 

From the foregoing it will be noticed that Mr. Bailey was con- 
cealing his movements and the business upon which he was engaged, 
to-wit: a surreptitious effort, through political influence or otherwise, 
to establish the Standard Oil monopoly back in Texas. 

BAILEY WANTED IN TEXAS FOR HIS PERSONAL AND POLITICAL INFLU- 
ENCE — NOT AS A LAWYER. 

Attorney John D. Johnson, of the Waters-Pierce Oil Company, 
admitted frankly to the Bailey Investigation Committee (Report, pp. 
103-104) of the Thirtieth Legislature, 1907, that, having exhausted 
their legal resources in the matter of continuing business in Texas, 
they then resorted to the employment of Bailey for his "personal and 
political influence." Here is his language, plain and callous: 

"Let me tell you the story of that [trip to Texas] as I recall it. 
When the Supreme Court at Washington affirmed the judgment in 
the main case here, cancelling the license of the old Waters-Pierce 
Oil Company, we began, Mr. Pierce and I began, looking around 
considering. [What?] il/r. Pierce wanted to employ some addi- 
tional counsel who possessed personal and political influence. [Is 
not that plain enough to convince the people of Texas that they wanted 
to buy, not legal talent, but Mr. Bailey's "personal and political influ- 
ence?"] It is very natural for clients to look around for good lawyers 
of that character. He had never met Senator Bailey, but was very 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 129 

favorably impressed with tiirn. [Doubtless so impressed through 
their mutual friend, Governor Francis, who well knew, on account 
of the World's Fair and Gibbs Ranch deal, that Senator Bailey's 
political influence was for sale — not in a coarse, open, bribe-take and 
bribe-give fashion, perhaps, but nevertheless for sale.] In talking 
the matter over with Governor Francis one day, Mr. Pierce deter- 
mined to come down here and surrender on that indictment at Waco, 
so that he could give personal attention to it [he brought along with 
him over $2,000 in cash "for distribution at Waco account that in- 
dictment." See Naudain's testimony], and see Mr. Bailey here and 
make arrangements to employ Mr. Bailey on behalf of the Waters- 
Pierce Oil Co. That was the understanding." 

PIERCE AND JOHNSON IN TEXAS. 

Austin, Texas, May 2, 1900. 

President H. C. Pierce and attorney J. D. Johnson, after making 
application for a new permit to do business in Texas, left for Waco 
to adjust the indictment against him and judgment against his com- 
pany. — Galveston News, May 3, 1900. 

Mr. Bailey met them at Waco and there joined in the conspiracy 
which finally resulted in a dismissal of the penalty suits against the 
Company, as well as of the indictment against Pierce and by which 
conspiracy Oscar Stribbling was finally bribed by George Clark, Joe 
Bailey, J. D. Johnson and H. C. Pierce, into foresaking his duty to 
the State of Texas, as one of its attorneys in those matters. 

In addressing the State Convention at Austin June 21, 1900, Mr. 
Bailey asked: "If there is an anti-Bailey party, let it be crushed 
out." — Galveston News, July 22, 1900. 

BAILEY THREATENS POLITICAL WAR. 

Dallas, Texas, Aug. 6, 1900. 

This morning Congressman Joseph W. Bailey arrived in this city 
from his Grapevine Ranch in this county. This afternoon he de- 
parted for Waco to participate in the sessions of the Democratic Con- 
vention which will be called to order in that place Wednesday. Con- 
gressman Bailey goes to the Geyser City with blood in his eye and his 
fighting garments on his back. The cause of the fight he expects to 
make cannot be dtcelt upon. 

"But," said the Gainesville man, just prior to his departure, "I 
have nothing to concede and nothing to evade. My conscience is 
clear and I am willing to stand or fall by what I have done. The 
men who have made assaults upon me, have to face me. They are 
not after the Attorney-General and the Secretary of State. They 
failed to defeat me politically and now they are willing to go to any 
length to effect my undoing by vicious calumny and slime slinging. 
Let them come! I never sought such a fight as this, but so help me 
God. I will never run away from it." 

Congressman Bailey was accompanied by scores of delegates who 



130 Senator J. W. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

swear undying allegiance to him and declare that his battles will be 
fought to the last ditch. — Galveston News, Aug. 7, 1900. 

Waco, Texas, Aug. 7, 1900. 

"Tonight Mr. Bailey has been in conference with his lieutenants 
from the going down of the sun until a very late hour." — Galveston 
News, Aug. 8, 1900. 

Waco, Texas, Aug. 8, 1900. 

The most acrimonious and bitter fight in the history of the Demo- 
cratic party of Texas since the day when Richard Coke dethroned 
Edward J. Davis, is on. 

Congressman Bailey opened the ball in an hour's speech in which 
he flayed alive those who have imputed to him improper motives in 
connection with the relicensing of the Waters-Pierce Oil Company 
to do business in Texas. Mr. Bailey was very sensational, very dra- 
matic in his utterances at times and closed by denouncing those who 
were fighting him as "scoundrels, and liars." Mr. Bailey's partisans 
yelled themselves hoarse during the time he occupied the platform. — 
Galveston News, Aug. 9, 1900. 

bailey's speech at WACO STATE CONVENTION^ AUG. 8, 1900. 

"As sure as God lives and rules the universe, the re-election of Wm. 
McKinley is the beginning of the empire. He knows it and his par- 
tisans know it. * * * 

"If there is any man in Texas who has done anything to discredit 
our party and our State, bring him before the public and expose 
him. * * * 

"There isn't a man in Texas who believes there is money enough 
in the world to corrupt my judgment. [There were not many then 
but close to three million now.] 

"My fellow citizens, you are entitled to know just what relation 
I bear toward the re-entrance of the Waters-Pierce Oil Company into 
this State, and you shall know. 

"I have never done anything in my life that I wouldn't stand on 
and fear to let the whole world know it. [Why did he refuse to tell 
the Texas Legislature what fee he was to make out of the Tennessee 
Railroad deal?] * * * I have never done or said anytliin^ any- 
where that I would not do or say everywhere in the world. [^IVhat a 
perfect man!'\ 

"My fellow citizens, my part of that transaction was this: The 
president of the Waters-Pierce Oil Company, a life-long Democrat, 
[of the Joe Bailey grafting type, evidently] and I believe a gentle- 
man [then under indictment], brought me a letter from a man whose 
heart lays near mine [Francis]. For fifteen years he has been my 
friend and I have been his. [Francis testified before the committee 
in T907 that he only met Bailey once (1891) before (1899) at v/hich 
latter time they became well acquainted, on account of the World's 
Fair legislation.] He says that 'Mr. Pierce is in some complications 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 131 

in my State and I know nothing of what they are. I have told him to 
come to you and you would tell him the truth and deal honestly with 
him' [but dishonestly with the people of Texas]. I said, 'Mr. Fierce, 
I do not believe the people of Texas ought to, and I do not believe 
the people of Texas will, tolerate the methods of the Standard Oil 
Company. I would rather go back to the tallow candle than do it 
[but he has never gone unless they use tallow candles at the Waldorf- 
Astoria].' 'Mr. Bailey,' he said, 'you are still laboring under the 
impression that all the people in your State are under. We are not 
a part of the Standard Oil Company. I never owned a dollar's worth 
of that stock and the Standard Oil Company never owned a con- 
trolling interest in our Company.' [Evidently Mr. Pierce owned an 
interest, but less than a controlling interest]. 

" 'If that is true, Mr. Pierce,' I said, 'then go down to the State of 
Texas [where "all the people" were under the impression, according 
to Mr. Pierce's own statement to him, that the Standard controlled 
the Waters-Pierce Oil Company], and tell our Democratic officers 
[having failed to prove his story before the Courts of the land, Bailey 
advises him to whisper it to "Democratic officers"] that that is the 
truth. They want to know that you are not a part of the trusts and 
that you will abide by our law and you will have no trouble in being 
re-licensed to transact business in Texas.' 

"He offered to employ me as his attorney. I said, 'No, sir; you 
haven't got money enough to secure me. I would not be employed 
for such a purpose. [Mr. Bailey has many times said since that he 
would have accepted the employment direct from the Company if 
they had asked him.] I would not be employed for such a purpose. 
If you want to abide by the law, you won't need a lawyer. [Pierce 
had told Francis that he had good lawyers in Texas, but that "they 
did not seem able to get what he wanted." See Francis' testimony, 
1907.] Go down there and tell the Democratic officers of our State 
that you will be willing to do so, and they will be glad to have you 
resume business in the State of Texas. [Attorney-General Tom 
Smith testified on this point. House Journal, Page 165, January 18, 
1901, referring to the attorneys for the outlawed company: "They 
wanted to pay penalties, and suggested fabulous sums. I told them 
I would not consider money, that money was no object to Texas where 
principle was involved. That was all I had to say to them."] 

^^He took my advice. * * * The Attorney-General said to 
him, 'Mr. Pierce, this judgment is that your company should never 
again transact business in the State.' / happened to be at the capital 
at that time, and talked with the Attorney-General. [Attorney-Gen- 
eral Smith and Mr. Bailey were classmates in Mississippi.] * * » 
I then said to the President of the Waters-Pierce Oil Company, 'You 
go and purge yourself. [Was he to vomit up some of his accumu- 
lated oil (Standard Oil) gains?] You go and come back to the State 
with dean hands, take the oath that you will abide by our laws; and 
then we will be ready to welcome you or any other legitimate busi- 
ness.' 



132 Senator J. W. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

"I said, 'Mr. Pierce, make up your mind tha4 you must abide by 
these laws. [Listen to this Standard Oil Senator, delivering a moral 
lecture to a Standard Oil barron on the sacredness of Law! How 
well and faithfully Pierce observed these injunctions by his distin- 
guished preceptor is shown by his own testimony at St. Louis, Septem- 
ber lo, 1906, after he had "gone and come back," making six to seven 
hundred per cent, per annum out of the people of Texas, Mr. Bailey's 
constituents, in the meantime.] 

"He went and returned with a new charter, procured at an enor- 
mous expense — more than $50,000. [How and why did Bailey know 
these details as he merely "happened" to be at the State capitol at the 
time Pierce and Johnson "happened to be there," then three months 
ago, and of course he hadn't "happened" to see them since, or he, 
Bailey, would have said so.] 

"He (Pierce), took the oath that he was not a part of any trust; 
that he was in no combination or agreement in violation of the Laws 
of the State of Texas; he solemnly promised to abide by our laws, and 
I happen to know that today [must have been in pretty close touch 
with this Waters-Pierce Oil Company business and its readmission, 
although in January, 1907, he wrote Charles Fred Tucker, that, "He 
had nothing more to do with it than Tucker had to do with the salva- 
tion of immortal souls"] he has issued to every agent in this State a 
special written instruction to abide the anti-trust laws of Texas in let- 
ter and in spirit [and of course they did so and the jury at Austin in 
June, 1907, in finding the Company guilty of having violated those 
laws, every day after Bailey intervened for the company, and fixing 
the penalty at $1,623,900, was simply prejudiced against Mr. Bailey 
and therefore "stuck" the company]. 

"What more do you want?" cried Mr. Bailey to the assembled 
Democracy, and his dupes cheered wildly. [Oh, Texans, what has 
become of your boasted independence that worships not men of clay, 
but has regard only to principles, to justice, and to truth!] 

"I believed," continued this great tribune of Standard Oil, "I 
had secured a triumph for the State of Texas by helping to bring the 
greatest trading corporation within our borders to the feet of the At- 
torney-General of the State with a solemn oath in their hands, that 
they would abide the laws." 

This was a banished and outlawed company at the end of four 
3'ears' litigation to the Supreme Court of the United States, whose 
final mandate of expulsion was filed in the trial court at Austin April 
25, 1900, the very date that Bailey first met Pierce and borrowed (?) 
$3,300. Pray, Texans, of what force is "a solemn oath" to a Standard 
Oil magnate and its political attorneys who peddle official influence? 

Delegate Donovan, of Colorado City, actually had the impu- 
dence, think of it, Texans, to brazenly interrupt a Standard Oil can- 
didate for the United States Senate with this impertinent question: 
"Mr. Bailey, did you not, at that time, recognize the fact that you 
were negotiating with a criminal, who was under indictment in the 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 133 

courts of Texas?" Mr. Bailey waved his arms and shouted a reply, 
but it was lost to the reporters in the great uproar created by this 
champion of the interests and his idolators. When the confusion had 
subsided Mr. Bailey continued: "Let me say this: That the law 
was designed to compel men to obey it. [And the people of Texas 
were paying J. W. Bailey to aid in its enforcement, whereas he had 
bartered his influence to aid the enemies of the people in evading it.] 
What more do you want than obedience to it. Now, my fellow citi- 
zens, I need only state that at Austin I stated to those people: 'You 
must go to Waco and pay the penalty which has been instituted 
against you there.' I came to Waco [just happened to come?] I 
said to the County Attorney: 'Mr. Thomas, I do not know enough 
about Mr. Pierce to vouch for his veracity, but I do know Dave 
Francis [the Standard Oil Governor of Missouri who had helped 
Bailey buy an hundred thousand dollar ranch at a time that he, Fran- 
cis, was trying to keep Bailey "quiet" and prevent him from opposing 
the St. Louis Exposition as he, Bailey, had opposed the Chicago Ex- 
position], and I believe anything he says. He says, I can place cre- 
dence in Mr. Pierce, and Pierce says he will swear to obey the laws. 
I believe that he is going to do it, [Listen at the jingle of that $3,300 
in Bailey's pocket at that very moment], and I believe that you ought 
to settle with him on that basis, being sure that he pays a penalty that 
shall vindicate the authority of the State of Texas. [Now Bailey says, 
"If you fine them in the courts, they will fine you in the market place. 
Put them in stripes."] 

"Who says that is wrong?" (A voice— "Me") Mr. Bailey: 
"Who?" (Another voice — "An idiot.") Mr. Bailey: "No, he is 
not an idiot, he is a scoundrel, the man that says it." (Cheers and 
hisses and terrific uproar.) 

Mr. Bailey: "Listen to me: I have told these facts. They have 
been differently stated, but I challenge any man in this hall to stand 
up in my presence and say that I misstated them. * * * If you 
do not repeat it in my presence and yet repeat it when I am gone, I 
denounce you both. [To the delegates] as a liar and scoundrel." — 
Galveston News, August 9, 1900. 

The Chairman appealed to the Sergeant at Arms to restore order 
and thus did Mr. Bailey finish his brilliant defense (?) in a character- 
istic "holier than thou" oratorical flight. 

At the close of Mr. Bailey's speech there came a wild, hoarse cry 
for "Hogg! Hogg!! Hogg!!! Hogg!!!! Jim Hogg, get up and 
give us your side." Then followed that memorable speech by the 
great naive Texan, whose heart always beat warm and true to the in- 
terests of the common people. Mr. Hogg's speech followed closely 
his address to the bar association at Galveston on the same subject 
which is hereinafter set out. (See Appendix.) 

A resolution was offered in the committee on platforms and reso- 
lutions condemning the Waters Pierce Oil Company's fraudulent re- 
admission, but Mr. Bailey's friends, among them D. W. Odell of 



136 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

"I sent for Mr. Smith to come to my room and I said, 'I see that 
statement [that Mr. Smith would vote against him e.xcept for his 
instruction], and 1 want to relieve you so far as I can from your in- 
structions. [Why didn't he relieve all the members of the I'hirtieth 
Legislature in 1907 of their instructions?] I would like for you to 
vote against me. I would like to see what the folks in Collins County 
would do to you at the next election.' [Why didn't he wait to see 
what the people of Texas would do to the members of the Thirtieth 
Legislature if he should release them?]" 

In the investigation of 1901 Hon. D. A. McFall was sought to be 
made to occupy the position of Prosecutor, whereas he was entitled 
to the position of Chairman of that Investigation Committee by rea- 
son of having introduced the original resolution. In a letter to the 
Committee, dated Austin, Texas, January, 1901, Judge McFall said: 
"At Mr. Bailey's instance and request the House forced over my pro- 
test a substitute, putting my name into the resolution as charging the 
things therein charged. Had I been placed on the committee of in- 
vestigation as every consideration of practice, precedent, courtesy 
and fairness demanded that I should, as the author of the original 
resolution, I would have given tlie committee all the assistance in 
my power to ascertain all the facts surrounding the matter to be in- 
vestigated. The resolution provides that the committee shall ascer- 
tain the facts and report them to the House. So by no stretch of 
fancy can it be called a trial court. I refuse to allow the com- 
mittee to place me in a position of prosecuting attorney." 

During the hearings of the committee in 1901, Bailey did not re- 
quire the services of three able lawyers, as was the case in the investi- 
gation of 1907. There was not nearly so much light to be shut off 
then, as in TQOy. 

He tried the same game of blufif and bluster, brag and bulldoz- 
ing, only in more vicious forms, before the committee of 1907, but 
he did not succeed in covering up all the facts with reference to his 
trust affiliations as he had done in 1901. 

BAILEY WHITEWASHED IN 1901. 

The McFall Resolution (House Journal, 27th Legislature, page 
136) charged that the "act of dissolution and re-incorporation" of 
the Waters-Pierce Oil Company in 1900 "was perpetrated upon the 
State of Texas" as "a fraud which has brought her laws and courts 
into disrepute both at home and abroad, and shame and humiliation 
upon her people; * * * that in the accomplishment of their pur- 
poses and perpetrating of said alleged fraud, the officers of said 
Waters-Pierce Oil Company had the passive assistance of certain 
State officials, and the active assistance of Congressman Joseph W. 
Bailey, who is now a candidate before the Legislature for the high 
office of United States Senator." 

The committee "for the purposes of obtaining testimony, was 
vested with all the powers possessed by the District Courts of this 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 137 

State," and was instructed to investigate "all the facts connected 
with, incident to, or surrounding said transaction." 

The committee met and invited Mr. McFall "to be present dur- 
ing the sittings of this committee and to present his charges as speci- 
fically as he can." Hon. D. A. McFall was sick at the time and 
finally refused to be put in the attitude of personally preferring 
charges or to assume the role of a private prosecutor, when, as a 
matter of fact, he should have been chairman of the committee. 
Under the dictation of Bailey (House Journal 27th Legislature, 
pages 137-139) the committee issued a subpoena and thus sought t© 
force him to appear before the committee. This was repeated on the 
i6th of January in the face of a certificate filed with the committee 
by Dr. J. H. Wooten to the effect "that Judge D. A. McFall is con- 
fined to his room by sickness and it will not be safe, in his present con- 
dition, to go out at all." This certificate was repeated the next day. 

On January i6th, 1901, Hon. D. A. McFall forwarded to the 
Chairman of the Committee the following letter: "Although the 
resolution under which your Committee was appointed makes no pro- 
vision for the preferring of charges, and though I have refused here- 
tofore to make charges because of this fact, yet as it seems that your 
committee will take no action whatever unless charges are made, I 
desire to say that I will make formal charges today and hope to have 
them before you at your afternoon session. In order to save time I 
have requested that you issue your subpoenas for Hon. Cullen F. 
Thomas, of Waco, and Hon. Barnett Gibbs." 

On the 17th of January, 1901, Hon. D. A. McFall filed the fol- 
lowing specifications (House Journal, 27th Legislature, pages 148- 
149) to-wit: 

The State of Texas, 
County of Travis. 

Comes now D. A. McFall, a member of the Legislature from 
Travis County, and charges and presents that heretofore, to-wit: 

on the day of , 1897, ^h^^e was instituted in the District 

Court of Travis County, Texas, by her Attorney General, M. M. 
Crane, a suit in the name of and on behalf of the State of Texas and 
against the Waters-Pierce Oil Company for alleged violations of the 
statutes of this State, known as the anti-trust statutes; that upon trial 
said court rendered judgment in favor of the State as against the 
defendant, decreeing that defendant's permit to do business in Texas 
should be cancelled and awarding an injunction perpetual against 
its ever transacting business again in this State. That this judgment 
was on appeal sustained by the Court of Civil Appeals for the Third 
Supreme Judicial District of Texas, the Supreme Court of Texas 
and the Supreme Court of the United States. That after said affirm- 
ance by the Supreme Court of the United States the defendant com- 
pany entered into negotiations with the State officials having the 
matter in charge looking to some compromise whereby the force 



138 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

and effect of said judgment might be avoided. That in the accom- 
plishment of this purpose they were assisted by Congressman Joseph 
W. Bailey who appeared in their interest in Austin, on towit, May 
the first, 1900, and urged upon the State authorities the pursuing 
of a course of conduct which would enable said company to con- 
tinue to do business in this State, notwithstanding the judgment afore- 
said, and that by reason of said Bailey's influence and personal 
and political popularity and prestige they were enabled by a mere 
sham of dissolution and reincorporation to evade the force of said 
judgment and continue to do business in Texas. 

Second: Complainant further charges and presents, that on the 

day of , 1895, there were filed in the District Court of 

McLennan County, Texas, by the county attorney of said county 
on behalf of the State certain suits against the said Waters-Pierce 
Oil Company for alleged violations of said anti-trust act in which the 
aggregate amount of penalties was $105,000 (one hundred and five 
thousand dollars) ; that the said Joseph W. Bailey did, on or about 
the second day of May, 1900, accompany H. C. Pierce, President of 
the said Waters-Pierce Oil Company, to Waco for the purpose of 
holding a consultation with the county attorney of McLennan county 
with a view to compromising said suits; that the proposition of com- 
promise submitted by said Pierce was the payment of $10,000 (ten 
thousand dollars) to the State in full of her claims, and the payment 
of $3,500 (three thousand and five hundred dollars) to the county 
attorney as an extra fee for advising the compromise, and that the 
said Bailey endorsed said proposition and urged its acceptance. 

D. A. McFall, 
Representative Travis County. 

In answer to the charges made in the statement of Mr. McFall's, 
Mr. Bailey said: "I desire to state, that I came to Austin, Texas, on 
a political matter; and the charges in there, that Mr. Cullen F. 
Thomas, County Attorney of McClennan county, should take a 
dollar is an absolute falsehood." 

Bailey has always pretended, in order to cover up the real pur- 
pose of his return to Texas, ALiy, 1900, that he came back "on a 
political matter." Both Governor Francis and J. D. Johnson testi- 
fied before the Investigation Committee of 1907 that he went to St. 
Louis as a result of telegrams from Francis, in pursuance of an 
agreement between Francis and Pierce, and that he came back to 
Texas at the solicitation of and under an agreement with Pierce, first 
having borrowed (?) $3,300 from the latter, that Pierce and 
J. D. Johnson would meet him at Austin and then proceed to Waco. 

TESTIMONY OF HON. CULLEN F. THOMAS, WACO, TEXAS. 

Hon. Cullen F. Thomas, County Attorney of McClennan 
County, testified before the Investigation Committee in 1901 (House 
Journal 27th Legislature, pages 149-155) as follows: 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 139 

In McClennan County there had been some litigation with the 
Waters-Pierce Oil Company. In 1895 a civil suit was filed against 
the Waters-Pierce Oil Company for the forfeiture of the statutory 
penalty. That suit in amount aggregated $105,000. About the same 
time the grand jury of McClennan county returned indictments 
against certain officers and agents of the Waters-Pierce Oil Company 
including Mr. H. C. Pierce, Mr. Finlay and some of the local agents 
in Texas, or rather defendant's agents. Shortly after the indictments 
were returned one of the agents was tried in the District Court of 
McClennan county (Mr. Hathaway) ; that was during the term 
of my predecessor, J. W. Taylor. Mr. Hathaway was convicted, 
and the case was appealed to the Court of Criminal Appeals and re- 
versed by that court. The reversal was shortly prior to my elec- 
tion as county attorney. One of the first cases in which I represented 
the State, was a few days after I qualified, the habeas corpus, or 
rather an application for the writ of habeas corpus, was presented 
to the federal judge of the Waco district, Judge Swain. At that 
time Gen. Crane was Attorney General, and we together represented 
the State on that habeas corpus proceeding, sued out by the four 
agents. 

At that time Mr. Pierce had not been arrested. He was living 
in St. Louis. At the hearing of the habeas corpus suit in Dallas, 
Judge Swain held that the anti-trust law of this State was unconsti- 
tutional. From his ruling an appeal was taken to the Supreme Court 
of the United States, at which appeal Gen. Crane represented the 
State. The Supreme Court reversed that decision of Judge Swain 
without passing on the constitutionality of the law. They reversed 
the case on the ground that, under the allegations of the petition for 
habeas corpus, the law did not properly lie. That left these defend- 
ants at large. Shortly after that the case was filed at Austin, with 
which I presume the committee are familiar. Gen. Crane alleging 
that the Waters-Pierce Oil Company was a trust, and further, spe- 
cial violations of the anti-trust law in this State. The cases were in 
suspension at Waco, awaiting the result of the Court of Appeals. 
About one year ago the constitutionality of that law was sustained. 
When that was done we began to get ready for the trial of the crimi- 
nal and civil cases in Waco. Both had been going along on the 
docket awaiting that decision. When that was rendered the four 
defendants, agents of the company, came into the court and surren- 
dered — in the District Court. 

Q. Was Mr. Pierce one of the agents? 

A. Mr. Pierce was not one of the agents, but shortly after the 
rendering of that decision Mr. Pierce came to Texas and surren- 
dered to await his trial on that indictment. An eflfort had been made 
to extradite Mr. Pierce in the meantime. That was the condition 
of these suits in May last [1900I. The civil suits had been filed, 
as I stated, by my predecessor, Mr. Taylor, with the firm of Henry 
i"*;: Stribling, as associate counsel. A contract had been made between 



140 Senator J. JV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

them for a division of the fee. In May, last year, I believe either 
the 2d or 3d day of May, a compromise of that litigation was sug- 
gested — on the morning of May 2d or 3d. 

Q. By whom was the first compromise suggested? 

A. By Mr. Bailey. On that morning I met Mr. Bailey accident- 
ally at the State House — I was there at the time. If my memory 
serves me right, we met in the dining room and he told me in there 
that he desired to see me. After breakfast he and I went down the 
street together from the State House towards the main business part 
of town. We met several friends along the way, and when we 
reached the corner of Fourth and Franlclin, about the Provident 
building, Mr. Bailey said to me that he wanted to talk with me with 
regard to the Waters-Pierce Oil Company's litigation in our courts. 
His reference to the matter was very brief at the time. My recol- 
lection of the matter is that he brought up the subject in this way: 
"By the way, Thomas, you have some suits here against the Waters- 
Pierce Oil people. I promised my friend, David Francis, of St. 
Louis, that I would speak to the officials in regard to the matter. I 
don't know anything in particular about the merits of this litigation, 
but he is a friend of mine, and asked me to speak to the officials about 
it, and to do whatever you could do, using some qualifying words as 
consistently or properly with reference to the matter, I would be glad 
to have you do so, or do it." I believe that is the substance of Mr. 
Bailey's remarks at that time. That forenoon I was invited to a con- 
ference at the Pacific Hotel. That same forenoon I was invited by 
Mr. Henry or Mr. Stribling in Mr. Henry's room at the Pacific 
Hotel — his family being away. I went to the conference. There 
were present at that time Mr. Henry, Mr. Stribling and Judge Scott, 
in whose court both the civil and criminal suits were pending. The 
question of compromise was discussed at that time. I don't know that 
the committee care anything about the details of that, as Mr. Bailey 
was not present. [But he was at next conference.] 

Q. Mr. Bailey was not present? 

A. No, sir. At that conference Mr. Henry stated that Mr. Pierce 
was in the city with his attorney, Mr. Johnson, and that they were 
there for the purpose of settling their troubles in the courts. There 
had been no discussion whatever between Mr. Stribling and myself 
with reference to any compromise of the litigation. They stated: 
"That Mr. Pierce had made no offer to compromise the civil suits." 
They did not know at that time exactly what he would make, but they 
thought from what they could gather — they didn't state from whom 
— that he would pay something like $10,000 or $12,000 as a judgment 
to the State, and that in addition thereto he would pay them a fee — 
my recollection is — of $2,000. 
Q. To whom? 

A. Henry & Stribling. Thev claim that the offer at that time 
was $3,000 instead of $2,000, which is immaterial. 

Q. Henry & Stribling were representing the State at that time? 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 141 

A. They were originally employed by Taylor. They drew the 
petition on which these suits were filed, and 1 think did most of the 
work. That proposition was this, in brief, as coming from Mr. 
Pierce, whom I did not see, — that he would pay to the State about 
$10,000 or $12,000 but I think $10,000; that they would give to me 
their interest in the statutory fee, and that Mr. Pierce would pay them 
a fee, as I recollect, of $2,000 — as they remember $3,000. The 
amount of fees was discussed by those present. The law under which 
those suits were brought provided for 10 per cent, of the amount as 
attorney's fees. Their contract was for a division of that. They 
claiming two-thirds. I told them, that as to the amount of the com- 
promise, I was not perfectly familiar with the merits of the suits, and 
did not know what would be a proper compromise — if any was proper 
— that on principle, I was opposed to compromising the litigation on 
any grounds. And in the conversation cited some suits that had been, 
compromised in this State. If a compromise was to be made, I did 
not know enough of the merits of the litigation to know what would 
be proper. I will state further, that I said that I did not know that 
it would be proper, whatever the amount that might be paid by Mr. 
Pierce, for them to receive any extra compensation. That our com- 
pensation was fixed by law; that we were not entitled to any more. 
They stated, "that they would take a reasonable fee, and that they 
would have the amount of compensation they received entered as part 
of the judgment." I told them when they offered the money to me, 
their part of the lo^c, that I would be in the attitude of approving 
that some fee be taken and the 10%. Judge Scott was there a part of 
the time. He left the three together, with the statement that as ive 
acere attorneys representing the State he ivould approve of any settle- 
ment that ive agreed upon. 

Q. Was anything said at that time to Judge Scott about paying 
Henry & Stribling any other fee? 

A. He teas present at the time the statement was made and said 
that he would approve. Judge Scott took little part in that confer- 
ence. 

Q. He was sitting where he could hear what was said in regard 
to the fee? 

A. Yes, sir. Most of the talk was between Mr. Henry and Mr. 
Stribling and myself. 

Q. He interposed no objection at that time? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. He afterwards stated that he would approve any settlement 
agreed on, or any settlement that the attorneys agreed on? 

A. Yes, sir. He stated so at that time. Messrs. Henry k Strib- 
ling asked me if I would meet Mr. Pierce that afternoon for confer- 
ence. I told them that I did not care to. They said he was here for 
the purpose of making some adjustment of the litigation, and that 
there was nothing improper in conferring with him in regard to it. 
I stated that I was willing to go and hear what Mr. Pierce ha'd to say; 



142 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

but as far as making any proposition, I could not do that. They 
arranged for a meeting in the office of Henry & Stribling. There are 
some details along there that 1 don't suppose the committee care any- 
thing about. That afternoon about 3 p. m. I went to their office, and 
found there Mr. Pierce, Messrs. Henry & Stribling, and I believe 
that Mr. Johnson, his attorney, was there. I know he was. We had 
been there about five minutes when some one knocked at the door — 
Mr. Stribling admitted him— that is, Mr. Bailey. We remained in 
that conference about two hours, I suppose. During that time there 
was a general discussion, all hands joining, of the Waters-Pierce Oil 
Company litigation with reference to this suit. 
Q. What part was Mr. Bailey taking in this? 
A. Mr. Bailey was present and entered into the discussion. Mr. 
Bailey made this statement at that time, in substance, that he only 
knew in a general way the merits of these cases, that "I have not 
known Mr. Pierce personally," that he didn't know much about Mr. 
Pierce, that he was induced to become interested at the request of his 
friend, David R. Francis; that he knew Mr. Francis and that Mr. 
Francis would vouch for Mr. Pierce, and that he (Mr. Bailey) 
would vouch for Mr. Francis. He said he told Mr. Pierce that he 
needed no attorneys; that the only interest he (Mr. Bailey) had was 
as a citizen of Texas. [How about the $3,300 "interest" then in his 
pocket?] That he would be glad to see the litigation so adjusted as 
to protect the dignity of the State; enforce respect for her laws; give 
outsiders in the world general notice that our laws must be respected 
and obeyed, and that the attorneys and the officials were not perse- 
cuting capital. He further said, that personally he icould be glad to 
see the criminal case against Mr. Pierce dismissed, and he would be 
glad to see an adjustment in the civil cases that would both satisfy and 
protect the State, and not mulct the defendant, and further, that he 
thought Messrs. Henry & Stribling, as originators of the litigation, 
should be paid a liberal fee by Mr. Pierce. 

I left the four gentlemen in Mr. Henry's office — Mr. Pierce, 
Messrs. Henry & Stribling and Mr. Bailey. When I left these gen- 
tlemen at that time, Mr. Henry asked me to meet him and Mr. Strib- 
ling that night, — I was quite busy at the time, — at the Pacific Hotel. 
I did so. We three had a conference and they told me, "That after 
I had left, they had discussed the matter in detail, or more in detail 
with Mr. Pierce, and that they had from him a proposition;" that 
proposition was to pay to the State — it is simply a repetition of what 
they mentioned that morning, and said they had gathered so and so. 
That night they said he would pay $10,000 or $12,000, and would 
pay them an extra fee. I stated to those gentlemen at the time, that 
so far as I was concerned, I could not agree to any proposed compro- 
mise, irrespective of the amount of the judgment. / was opposed to 
any fee being paid by Mr. Pierce, outside of the statutory fee. They 
were more familiar with it than I; they had brought the suit; that it 
ha'd been hanging fire with nothing being done and ordinarily I would 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 143 

be disposed to yield to their judgment of a proper compromise, but 
I could not do so under the circumstances. 1 told them we cannot 
compromise at all. The thing was declared off. We could not com- 
promise at all with extra fee proposition. 

Q. Were you willing to compromise, providing they could agree 
upon the fee? 

A. Yes, sir; I made a statement, that considering the amount in- 
volved, that I thought $25,000 was small enough and would not be 
an unreasonable amount. That night Mr. Pierce went home. I did 
not see any more of Mr. Johnson. 

Q. Where was Mr. Bailey stopping? 

A. At the State House. 

Q, You did not see him after the conversation in the afternoon? 

A. I think I did. I didn't talk with him. / saw Mr. Bailey and 
Judge Scott with him. I think Mr. Bailey had Judge Scott with him 
at supper that night at the State House. 

In the second conference held in Mr. Henry's office [June ist 
(Friday), 1900], (Mr. Henry being at that time in Washington) 
Mr. Pierce stated that he had adjusted matters satisfactorily at Aus- 
tin — happily, I think, was the word he used— and that the litigation 
in Waco was all that was troubling him, and his explanation was that 
/ seemed to be the only stumbling block. He said he was a little sur- 
prised not to be able to compromise the suits; that he had been in- 
formed by Mr. Bailey that the proposition, that he finally made, 
would be accepted. 1 stated to him that 1 didn't know by what au- 
thority Mr. Bailey had made that statement, for I had not seen Mr. 
Bailey nor communicated with him, nor him with me after the first 
visit. Judge Scott was present at another conference with Judge 
Clark and Mr. Johnson. Judge Clark and Mr. Ballinger were his 
attorneys in that litigation at Waco. Judge Scott made the statement 
that he had said to Mr. Bailey, as to the civil suits, he would approve 
the proposition made as far as he was concerned. 

Q. What were the specific charges against the Waters-Pierce 
Oil Company for which these civil suits were brought? 

A. They alleged that the Waters-Pierce Company was a part or 
branch of the Standard Oil trust, and also charged that the methods 
of the Waters-Pierce Company in this State was to smother competi- 
tion and so on. 

JOHN L. LITTLE TELLS OF BAILEY'S FIRST INVESTIGATION. 

Hon. J. L. Little, a member of the Investigation Committee of 
1901, voluntarily came to Austin and testified before the second In- 
vestigation Committee in 1907 (Report, pages 366-373), on cross- 
examination, as follows: 

I do not think we asked Judge George Clark to come down and 
testify. [At the former investigation.] I do not remember whether 
we made an effort to get the testimony of John D. Johnson or H. C. 
Pierce. No we did not subpoena Mr. Stribling, although his name 



144 Senator J. W. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

was freely used in connection with the testimony given by Mr. 
Thomas and Mr. Bailey. There was not very much at that time to 
base an investigation upon. I don't think the Committee asked for 
Judge Scott to come down and testify. 

Q. Do you remember this language as attributed to Mr. Bailey 
at that time as is shown by page 154 of the House Journal [Twenty- 
Seventh Legislature] of that session: " * * * I hope that this 
Committee will not make it necessary for Mr. Henry to come here?" 

A. — I do not recall those words, but if that is in the House Jour- 
nal I guess that is correct. [In this connection it is very interesting 
to note that Mr. Bailey not only opposed Mr. Henry being called 
as a witness before the Twenty-Seventh Legislature but, as shown by 
page 379, Investigation Committee Report, 1907, Mr. Bailey again 
opposed the Committee waiting to hear Mr. Henry's testimony. 
Placing his opposition, however, on the ground that he, Bailey, ought 
not to be detained away from Washington until Mr. Henry could 
come and testify. It will be remembered that Mr. Henry did come 
and testified, however, and among other things said that he showed 
Mr. Bailey the original Standard Oil Trust Agreement to vvhich the 
Waters-Pierce Oil Company, or the majority of its stockholders, were 
parties. Tliis is perhaps the real reason Mr. Bailey did not want Mr. 
Henry on the stand.l 

No, sir, Mr. Bailey did not tell the Committee [in 1901] anything 
about having borrowed $3,300 from Mr. Pierce on the occasion of 
their meeting in St. Louis, nor did he say anything about having re- 
ceived any other loans irom Mr. Pierce. The Committee had no 
other way of finding it out that I know of. I am sure I did not know 
anything about that matter. Our Committee meetings were all held 
publicly. Any one could be present. [Not so, however, with the 
Committee of 1907. They must needs conduct their whitewash of 
the great Senator behind closed doors, so far as the public was con- 
cerned. It would have been too bad to have exposed their immacu- 
late Senator to the humiliation of a public inquiry open to the citizens 
of Texas — at least they seemed to think so.] 

METHODS OF BAILEY WHITEWASH COMMITTEE OF 1901. 

Hon. A. T. Cole, a witness for Mr. Bailey and a member of the 
Investigation Committee of 1901, testified, pages 600-602 (Bailey 
Invest. Com., 1907), in part as follows: 

The D. A. McFall bill, before the 27th Legislature, related to 
the revocation of the permit of the Waters-Pierce Oil Company to 
do business in Texas. After the introduction of that bill in the House 
— I suppose about a week — I saw Senator Bailey in Austin after the 
bill was introduced into the House, down at the Driskill hotel, and 
had a conference with him. The reference he made to the bill was 
that it was simply a legislative declaration of a revocation of that per- 
mit, and that it was not good, would be without force, and that the 
only thing in it was a political thrust at him — an effort to appeal to 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 145 

those who were opposed to corporations to get a change in the vote 
of the House; that is, an expression that would appear to go against 
him. [At this point the witness was about to relate a conversation 
with Hon. D. A. McFall, deceased, to which Mr. Cocke objected 
for the reason that the Committee had not allowed him to introduce 
testimony concerning conversations with the elder Suggs, deceased, 
that would seriouslv implicate Mr. Bailey as practicing for pay or 
loans before the Departments.] 

Mr. Cocke (to the Chairman)— You mean to say now that he can 
state anything he said to Mr. Bailey that McFall had said to him? 

The Chairman — Any conversation he had with Senator Bailey. 

Mr. Cocke— Even if it states what Mr. McFall, a dead man, 
said? 

The Chairman — Yes, sir. 

The Witness— I think he [Bailey] said that he did not give a 
damn about it, so that they would cut that part out of it that would 
be a reflection on him. [That would have been the whole bill because 
the purposes of the bill was to exclude Bailey's fraudulently re-ad- 
mitted client — the Oil Trust.] 

We permitted hearsay testimony of any kind. [Before the Com- 
mittee of 1901.] There were no rules of evidence — that is, so far as 
the rules of law applied— at all. I do not think there was an objec- 
tion raised to testimony at all in the Committee. [They did not have 
the testimony to incriminate Bailey at that time. He made a great 
show according the investigation of 1901. Not so before the Com- 
mittee of 1907 when every artifice known to his lawyers and every 
trick of partisanship was resorted to to suppress the truth.] 

We did not have Mr. Pierce, nor Mr. Francis. Nobody asked 
for them, and we concluded it was not necessary. We did not have 
Judge Clark from Waco nor Mr. Henry; made no efforts to get St. 
Louis testimony. My recollection is that we knew nothing more 
about that, further than it was charged that he got the Grapevine 
ranch as a fee for that, and the investigation we went into was to see 
how Mr. Bailey got the Grapevine ranch. [And yet they did not 
even call for Francis who bought the ranch for Bailey, at the time 
that he was seeking Bailey's support for the St. Louis Exposition.] 

BAILEY OPPOSED DEPOSITIONS IN 1901. 

I think Mr. Bailey objected to our taking any depositions; he 
stated that he wanted the witnesses before us. I think perhaps the 
McFall Resolution probably did originally provide for depositions. 

COMMENT ON THE INVESTIGATION COMMITTEE OF 1901. 

While it is true that the Investigation Committee of 1901 had only 
a limited fund of information upon which to base a thorough investi- 
gation, it is to be noted that they confined their inquiry to Mr. Bailey 
whereas they were instructed to carefully and thoroughly investigate 
"all the facts connected with, incident to or surrounding" the fraudu- 



146 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

lent readmission of the Waters-Pierce Oil Company to do business 
in Texas in 1900. 

Mr. Bailey had everything his own way before that Committee. 
He did not then require the services of a lawyer or lawyers, his pop- 
ularity was great, his monetary dealings with Pierce unknown and it 
was an easy matter for him to successfully and profitably divert an 
attack on his client, the Waters-Pierce Oil Company, to himself. 

It is to be noted that the Committee of 1901 failed to call before it 
Oscar Stribling or George Clark, both of whose names were promi- 
nently connected with the transactions testified about before the Com- 
mittee. Neither did the Committee make any effort to secure the 
testimony of H. C. Pierce, J. D. Johnson, David R. Francis or other 
St. Louis witnesses. 

It is due the Committee of 1901, however, to say that, with the 
light before it at that time, it conducted a more exhaustive and im- 
partial investigation than did the Committee of 1907. The latter 
Committee might have known or discovered a vast deal more infor- 
mation if the majority of the Committee had really desired it. Being 
pre-determined, however, to shield Bailey from the beginning, the 
majority of the 1907 Committee became partizan suppressors rather 
than investigators of the truth. 

BAILEY UNDER OATH IN 1901. 

(House Journal, 27th Legislature, pages 157-166). 

Mr. Bailey was sworn, at his own request, and testified as follows : 

With the permission of the Committee, I will begin at the be- 
ginning of this matter. [But did he begin at the beginning? Francis 
testified in 1907 that he telegraphed Bailey to come to St. Louis, but 
Bailey does not say so in his testimony of 1901.] Just after the sena- 
torial contest had closed by the withdrawal of Senator Chilton, I 
started back to Washington. At St. Louis I met Mr. Pierce, [Note 
that he doesn't say how he came to meet him, whether by appoint- 
ment or accidentl. who presented me a letter from David R. Francis. 
* * * I said if you can make it plain that you are not a trust [he 
had failed to make it plain to the jury and to the courts of Texas and 
of the nation], and that you desire to obey our laws and conform to 
our policy, I will undertake to say you will have no trouble about it 
with our State. [How easy it was to convince him and how natural 
for Bailey to ask of Pierce a "loan" immediately after he was con- 
vinced but about which "loan" Bailey said absolutely nothing in his 
testimony in 1901, nor anything about his other financial transactions 
with Pierce between April, 1900, and the time he was testifying in 
January, 1901, notwithstanding he was sworn to tell "the truth and 
the whole truth."] 

I said to Mr. Pierce: "If you can convince me that your com- 
pany is not a trust and will agree to come to Texas and take the oath 
to obey the laws, I will undertake to say that you will have no trouble 
with the officials of the State." He then went fully into the business 



The Political Life-Story of a Fullen Idol U7 

and character of his company and after satisfying me that it was not 
a trust 1 told him that 1 intended to return to Texas in a few days on 
a political errand and while there I would lay the matter before the 
Attorney-General and the Secretary of State. [The two officers with 
whom Pierce must deal in getting a renewal or a new permit.] 

BAILEY KNEW OF STAXDARD OIL INTEREST IN WATERS-PIERCE OIL CO. 
OR COULD HAVE KNOWN IT FOR THE ASKING. 

The author believes that Mr. Pierce told Bailey at the time the 
exact relationship between the Waters-Pierce and the Standard Oil 
Company and that belief is based upon Mr. Bailey's own words, for 
Mr. Bailey testified openly that Pierce "then went fully into the 
business and character of the company." CuUen F. Thomas had just 
sworn: that Mr. Bailey said that the Standard Oil trust were owners 
of 1,200 shares of the capital stock of the Waters-Pierce Oil Com- 
pany, "at one time. That was not true when Mr. Pierce was in Waco. 
They did own it at one time, but there is nothing to show that they 
did own it at that time." Again, Mr. Bailey told the Waco Conven- 
tion in August, 1900, referring to Pierce's statement to him: "I never 
owned a dollar's worth of that stock and the Standard Oil Company 
never owned a controlling interest in our company." These three ex- 
pressions on Mr. Bailey's part go to show that Mr. Bailey did know 
of the stock ownership in the Waters-Pierce Oil Company by the 
Standard. 

The fact of the connection between the two companies was fully 
established by depositions then on file in the suits, both at Waco and 
at Austin; Mr. Henry testified in 1907 that he told Mr. Bailey of the 
connection in Waco in 1901 and showed Mr. Bailey a copy of the 
original Standard Oil trust agreement; and the fact of the connec- 
tion between the two companies had been a matter of congressional 
record for all the years that Mr. Bailey had been in Congress. 

Mr. Frederick Upham Adams, who has been in Texas for several 
months writing up the alleged history of the Waters-Pierce Oil Co., 
but, in fact, engaged in a specious plea and play for sympathy in be- 
half of H. Clay Pierce, makes this admission: "I am unable to 
ascertain just when the first public announcement was made of the 
relations existing between the Standard and Waters-Pierce; every 
well informed oil man knew it from the beginning. It became a part 
of a congressional document in 1888, at which time the House of 
Representatives made its first investigation of the trust. You will 
find it described on pages 301-313 of House Record No. 31 12, 
wherein is contained the Standard Oil trust agreement, which affirms 
that a portion of the stockholders of the Waters-Pierce Oil Company 
were members of the Standard Oil Trust. This damning fact was 
made public in 1888." And Mr. Bailey in his guileless innocence 
made haste to accept the unsupported word and a liberal "loan" from 
the then indicted and self-interested oil master, as proof positive in 
the premises. 



148 Senator }. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

SHOULD BAILEY HAVE ACCEPTED PIERCE'S STATEMENT? 

Had Bailey, when he called on Attorney-General Smith in the 
latter's office at Austin, May ist, 1900, asked Mr. Smith to verify 
Pierce's statement to Bailey that the Waters-Pierce Oil Company 
was wholly disconnected from the Standard Oil Co., the then Attor- 
ney-General would doubtless have shown Mr. Bailey a certified copy 
of the amendment of the charter of the Waters-Pierce Oil Company 
increasing its capital stock from $100,000 to $400,000 and which 
amendment was filed with Secretary of State Hardy when the appli- 
cation was made to that officer for a new permit in September, 1899. 
Said amendment (Bailey Investigation Committee Report, 1907, 
page 1041 ) showed : 

Chess-Carley Company, 600 shares $ 60,000 

William H. Waters, 1,200 shares 120,000 

Trustees Standard Oil Trust, 1,200 shares 120,000 

Three thousand shares $300,000 

Mr. Bailey would also doubtless have been shown by Attorney- 
General Smith from Secretary Hardy a letter to him dated Septem- 
ber 5th, 1899, calling attention to the fact that 1,200 shares belonged 
to the trustees of the Standard Oil Trust and that 600 shares (being 
1,800 out of 3,OGO shares) belonged to the Chess-Carley Company, 
and alleging fraud and stock ownership in violation of law. Attor- 
ney-General Smith doubtless would also have shown Mr. Bailey his 
reply to Secretary of State Hardy of date September 5th, 1899, re- 
ferring "to the fraud which it practiced against the State when it 
applied for its permit to do business on July 6th, 1899," and to the 
further fact, in said letter set out, that H. C. Pierce, according to the 
brief of his own attorneys, had "declined to state how much of the 
capital stock was owned by the Standard Oil Company and did not 
state that the Standard Oil Trust was one of its incorporators, and 
said nothing about the Chess-Carley Company being one of the in- 
corporators and owners of its capital stock." 

Mr. Bailey would have seen from Attorney-General Smith's let- 
ter, just referred to, that he advised the Secretary of State that "the 
proposed charter would therefore show upon its face that it is void 
and not to be filed." If Mr. Bailey had wanted to know the truth 
about the Standard Oil affiliations of the Waters-Pierce Oil Com- 
pany and he had interrogated Attorney-General Smith instead of ac- 
cepting Pierce's "loan" and word for it, Mr. Smith would doubtless 
have told him of the following facts which are incorporated in a let- 
ter to Secretary of State Hardy from the Attorney-General, dated 
July 20th, 1900, (Bailey Investigation Committee Report, 1907, page 
1040), describing the incidents of the previous year as follows: "In 
September, 1899, the attorney for the Waters-Pierce Oil Company 
came to Austin with a certified copy of its original charter, together 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 149 

with certified copy of the increase of capital stock, showing who the 
additional shareholders were, and he asked for a permit to do busi- 
ness in Texas. * * * I retained a copy at that time of said char- 
ter, together with the certificate of increase of capital stock showing 
who the additional shareholders were. * * * Chess-Carley 
Company, I have been reliably informed, was a corporation co-oper- 
ating with the Standard Oil trust in other States and the above facts 
show that the Standard Oil trust paid in $120,000 of the increased 
capital stock and the Chess-Carley Company $60,000, making 
$180,000 owned by a corporation and by a trust in the increased capi- 
tal stock of the Waters-Pierce Oil Company." 

Further on in the same letter Attorney-General Smith says also: 
'that when the application was made to file the new charter on May 
31, 1900: "Mr. Pierce stated that he had actually and in good faith 
purchased and was the owner of the stock held by the Standard Oil 
Company and the Chess-Carley company in the old company, and 
that said companies owning said stock had now no connection what- 
ever with the new Waters-Pierce Oil Company." ' 

In his testimony given during the investigation held in 1901, At- 
torney-General Smith was asked (page 1,028, 1907 report) : "You 
didn't let this Waters-Pierce Oil Company in until they had fully 
satisfied you that they were at least not a trust?" and replied: ^^They 
had changed their policy. [Did Smith get this information from 
Bailey?] They had come with a new charter. [And Bailey said 
something about "clean hands."] I would like for the Committee 
to understand this, that the statute says the Secretary of State shall 
issue the permit when they deposit their charter." This is his entire 
answer to the question and was so clearly a refusal to afiirm the state- 
ment that the applicant had satisfied him that it was not a trust, and 
so explicitly placed the readmissions of the company upon the ground 
that its reincorporation left no option with the State authorities that 
the significance of the answer cannot be misunderstood. 

* All this goes to show that both Bailey and Smith did know, or 
Bailey ought to have known, that the Standard Oil Company was 
dominating the afifairs of the Waters-Pierce Oil Company and would 
likely continue to do so. It further shows that Attorney-General 
Smith was not satisfied with the arrangement and was constrained, 
doubtless, in submitting thereto by Mr. Bailey's insistent persuasion 
through "personal and political influence." Smith likely relied, if 
he did rely at all, on Pierce's assurances of having purchased the 
Standard Oil interests, largely through Bailey's importunities and 
upon Bailey's recommendation of Pierce. Of course the "loan" (?) 
which Pierce had just made Bailey had nothing to do with the latter's 
conduct in this matter, nor did the large opening, which Bailey prob- 
ably saw in the future for him in connection with this rich trust mas- 
ter, have anything to do with his conduct. For Bailey has always 
said that he was actuated solely by his "friendship for David Francis 
whose heart lay close to mine." 



150 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

In the language of that noble Texas patriot, Senator E. G. Senter, 
of Dallas, let us ask: "Does Mr. Bailey still persist in the hallucina- 
tion that he investigated the Waters-Pierce Oil Company before he 
became its redeemer and found it as pure as snow, or will he now 
confess — upon reflection — that it was all the fault of his credulity 
and afifection for Francis?" 

But to continue with Mr. Bailey's story to the Twenty-Seventh 
Legislature (Investigation Report, 1901, H. J., p. 158) : 

I intended to stop at Hilsboro to talk with my friends there and 
telegraphed Mr. Stribling, of Waco, to meet me at Hilsboro, saying 
that he could return to Waco that same night on the Flyer. [And 
thus would they have been enabled to have caucused together in secret 
conference, the one a Congressman and then nominee for the United 
States Senate, the other a representative of the State of Texas in its 
suit against the trust masters.] * * * j continued my journey 
to Waco. I canvassed the political situation with some of my friends 
there and also conferred with the interested parties representing the 
JVaters-Pierce Oil Company litigation at that place. I then came on 
to Austin. * * * 

BAILEY REACHES AUSTIN BY A CIRCUITOUS ROUTE. 

Hon. Phil H. Clements, of Goldthwaite, Texas, both then and 
now a member of the Texas Legislature, related to the author the fol- 
lowing interesting facts concerning Mr. Bailey's appearance in Aus- 
tin on the morning of May i, 1900: 

Mr. Clements was in the I. & G. N. passenger depot at Taylor, 
Texas, in the early morning — just before day — of that day. The M., 
K. & T. R. R. tracks ran at that time due south from Waco to 
Taylor crossing the I. & G. N. tracks a few hundred yards to the east 
of the I. & G. N. passenger depot at Taylor. 

While Mr. Clements and one or two other gentlemen were wait- 
ing for the arrival of the south bound I. & G. N. train, a portly and 
well dressed individual entered the passenger depot from the track 
side. Apparently he had not come in from a hotel in Taylor but to 
all appearances had walked down the I. & G. N. track from the cross- 
ing of the M., K. & T. track. Why? 

A drummer said to Mr. Clements, as the pretentious stranger laid 
a fifty dollar bill on the ticket window and asked for a ticket to Aus- 
tin, "he must be a preacher." "No," said another, "A preacher would 
not have that much money." They then concluded that the pompous 
stranger must be "a politician." Some other small talk was indulged 
in and they concluded that a politician, like a preacher, would not 
likely be carrying fifty dollar bills (they were evidently unfamiliar 
with the practice of "political loans"), around with him, so they 
finally facetiously decided that the handsome stranger must be "a 
train robber." (Of course Mr. Clements knew all the time who it 
was but humored the joke.) Presently the train rolled in and all got 
aboard. The ticket man was unable to change the fifty dollar bill so 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 151 

the stranger kept his fifty dollars and when the conductor came 
through handed the latter a railroad pass. The drummer remarked 
to Mr. Clements that their "train robber" was carrying railroad 
passes, whereupon Mr. Clements said: "O pshaw! that's Joe Bailey." 

Mr. Clements says that Bailey came on to Austin and registered 
at the Driskil hotel; that on the same morning Pierce and Johnson, in 
Pierce's private car, arrived in Austin, having come up from Elgin 
ivhere the H. & T. C. makes connection icith the M., K. &" T. That 
Pierce's private car remained in the H. & T. C. yards while Pierce 
and Johnson and Bailey remained in Austin and until the three re- 
turned to Waco. 

This would indicate that Bailey came down the M., K. & T. from 
Waco with Pierce and Johnson and at the crossing of the M., K. & T. 
and I. & G. N. tracks, east of Taylor, left Pierce and Johnson in order 
to reach Austin over the I. & G. N. and thus avoid "the appearance 
of evil." "A guilty conscience needs no accuser." 

It was the author's intention to put Mr. Clements on the stand in 
proof of the above described incident, but the Committee closed the 
investigation summarily and Mr. Clements had gone home for a day 
or two at the time. He is a man of unquestioned veracity, however, 
and will verify the above statements at any time. 

BAILEY, PIERCE AND "CLEAN HANDS." 

Referring, in his testimony before the Committee in 1901, to his 
conference with Governor Sayers, Attorney-General Smith and Sec- 
retary of State Hardy, Mr. Bailey says : "1 concurred in his [Smith's] 
opinion that the Waters-Pierce Oil Company, then existing, could 
not be permitted to conduct its business in our State. I then told Mr. 
Pierce that the only way left for him to do was to dissolve that ofifend- 
ing corporation and organize a new one and come back into this State 
with clean hands, obey our laws, and they would have no further 
trouble with our people. * * * I told him [Pearce] that the 
only thing he could do was to dissolve the offending corporation, 
organize a new one, come into our State with clean hands and obey 
our laws." In his open letter on December 6th, 1906, to the Attorney- 
General of Texas, and replying to the latter's declaration that the 
Waters-Pierce Oil Company reentered this State under Bailey's 
"guidance and direction," Mr. Bailey said: "If you can find even 
one honorable man in the United States who will swear that I was 
ever consulted about the dissolution of the old company or the or- 
ganization of the new one, or that I ever spoke to any man, or that 
any man ever spoke to me about the issuance of a permit under which 
the Waters-Pierce Oil Company reentered this State * * * j 
will resign my seat in the Senate." This is in direct conflict with his 
testimony in 1901, above quoted, wherein he said that he "told Mr. 
Pierce that the only thing left for him to do was to dissolve that offend- 
ing corporation and organize a new one," etc. It is also in direct 
conflict with his statements at the Waco Convention, August 8th, 

1-12 



152 Senator J. W. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

1900, referring to Mr. Pierce, in this language: "He took my ad- 
vice. * * * He went and returned with a new charter, procured 
at an enormous expense — more than $5,000." 

BAILEY CONTRADICTS HIMSELF AGAIN. 

In his testimony in 1901 (House Journal,, page 160), Mr. Bailey 
said: "I will say that even if 1 had believed that the Waters-Pierce 
Oil Company had been a trust and they could have convinced me 
that they were willing to disorganize the unlawful trust [and that is 
just about what Pierce told him he would do] and organize a lawful 
and useful trading corporation, I would have assisted them in their 
reestablishment in our State." 

In his speech to the Waco Convention, August 8th, 1900, (Gal- 
veston News, August 9th, 1900), Mr. Bailey said: "He, [Pierce] 
offered to employ me as his attorney. I said, you have not got money 
enough to secure me. I would not be employed for such a purpose. 
If you want to abide by the law, you won't need a lawyer." 

In speaking of the matter in his testimony in 1901, Mr. Bailey 
said: "I had the assurance of Mr. Pierce, who is an honorable man, 
that his company was not a trust. * * * In the Secretary of 
State's office, Mr. Pierce has filed a very comprehensive oath, re- 
quired by our anti-trust act, and if his company is a trust he is subject- 
ing himself to conviction and imprisonment for perjury. [That was 
six years ago. Mr. Bailey has never said anything since about help- 
ing the people of Texas convict his friend Pierce of perjury, although 
it is now universally admitted that his company is and always has 
been a trust.] It is not reasonable to suppose that a man of his wealth 
would perjure himself and take chances of the penitentiary for the 
sake of adding a little more to what he already has. I do not think 
that a rich man is any less apt to swear a lie than a poor man, because 
that is a matter of character and not a matter of wealth. But I do 
think that a man that already has enough to live in luxury and ease is 
not apt to take the chance of being deprived of his liberty, and ren- 
dered infamous by a conviction for a felony, simply for the sake of 
the small difference [600 to 700/' ] in the sale of oil under the methods 
now employed by the Waters-Pierce Oil Company and the methods 
which they could employ if they sought to evade or violate our law. 
Not only would the consideration of Mr. Pierce for his character 
and personal safety restrain him from taking our anti-trust oath if 
his company were a trust, but common business prudence would like- 
wise forbid it. If his company is a trust, every time it sells a package 
of oil in this State it is liable for a penalty of $200, and as it probably 
sells 500 packages in Texas every day, it would be penalized in the 
sum of $100,000 every business day in the month. This would aggre- 
gate over two million and a half dollars a month, or more than thirty 
million dollars a year; and no business could afTord to incur such a 
risk. [But he did "incur the risk" and Bailey is now doing what he 
can (subrosa, perhaps) to help him avoid the penalty.] 

"I do not believe that it is within the reign of common reason that 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 153 

a man would come to this State and take the oath that his company is 
not a trust, thus swearing a lie; and — 

(By Mr. Decker). 

Q. That oath only lasted over a period of two days. 

A. That would be long enough to damn his soul forever, and 
put him in the penitentiary for years. If a man would swear to a lie 
for two hours, he would swear to it for two years." (H. J., 1901, 
p. 161). 

Query: In view of the fact that Pierce did swear falsely by con- 
cealing the real truth concerning the trust relations of his Company, 
and if Bailey did likewise in failing to disclose "the whole truth" in 
his sworn testimony before the 27th and possibly the 30th Legislatures 
of Texas, the question naturally arises : Did Pierce and Bailey, meas- 
ured by the proposition Bailey laid down above, "swear" sufficiently 
long to "damn their souls forever," and will they ever pay the State 
the penalty of serving in the "penitentiary for years?" Pierce's 
swearing lasted, perhaps, a minute in making the anti-trust affidavit; 
Bailey's swearing continued for several hours in 1901 and for several 
days before the Committee in 1907. But as comparisons are said to 
be odious further parallels and deductions will be left to the imagina- 
tion of the reader. 

bailey's ideals radically change. 

That Mr. Bailey's ideals have been radically changed by the gold 
cure of the money masters or that he was insincere in his expressions 
in 1901 is conclusively shown by his own language then and now. In 
his testimony before the Investigating Committee of 1901 (House 
Journal, page 162), Mr. Bailey said: 

"It is not pleasant to feel compelled to make a public statement 
of my private business afifairs, and it is still more disagreeable to feel 
compelled to state the private business arrangements of other gentle- 
men. But a man cannot stand upon a question of that kind when his 
integrity is assailed; and I have deemed it a duty to myself, my 
friends, and, most of all, to my party and to my State, to trace every 
dollar of the money paid for and received from the land, cattle, horses 
and mules purchased by me from Mr. Gibbs, so that no honest man 
can ever again misunderstand the transaction, and no scoundrel can 
ever again successfully misrepresent it." 

While on the stand, or stump, before the Investigation Commit- 
tee of 1907 Mr. Bailey was asked this question: 

Q. Senator, would you consider that it was proper to state what 
your fee was in the Central, in the Tennessee Railroad matter? 

A. / don't think that is anybody's business. 

If it was his duty, and he so declared, when his integrity was as- 
sailed in 1901, to make a clean breast of all his afifairs (which he did 
not do even then) was it not equally his duty to state frankly and fully 
his connection with all the matters under consideration by the Inves- 
tigation Committee of 1907? 



154 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

HONEST MEN AND PUBLIC SERVANTS. 

"Knowing that as an honest man," said Mr, Bailey to the Com- 
mittee in 1901 (House Journal, page 163), "I could make nothing 
in the public service, my only hope of a modest competence to protect 
me against an old age of poverty and want was that I could find some 
transaction like this [$100,000 Gibbs Land Deal] and by careful 
management save something out of it." To the Senate of the United 
States and to the world Mr. Bailey declared, in the summer of 1906 
while replying to the Cosmopolitan Magazine article entitled "The 
treason of the Senate," Mr. Bailey expressed an exactly opposite view 
to the one just quoted. His words were these: "I despise those pub- 
lic men who think they must remain poor in order to be considered 
honest." In 1901 he knew "that as an honest man he could make 
nothing in the public services," but having grown immensely rich in 
the five intervening years of his Senatorship he has come to "despise" 
the salutatory ideal expressed while he was yet poor in worldly wealth 
but rich, indeed, at that time, in the admiration and confidence of his 
countrymen. 

JOE SIBLEY, JOE BAILEY AND THE STANDARD OIL COMPANY. 

In his testimony before the Investigation Committee of 1901, 
(House Journal, page 162), Mr. Bailey paid the following glowing 
tribute to Mr. Joseph Sibley, sometimes Democrat and sometimes Re- 
publican, but always apparently for Joe Sibley and the Standard Oil 
bounty and booty. But here is Mr. Bailey's tribute: "My enemies 
have not been content to stop with dragging Mr. Francis, who was 
connected with me in a perfectly legitimate business transaction, into 
the political feuds of this State, but they have, also, attempted to stain 
the Hon. Jos. C. Sibley with their miserable accusations; although, 
as is shown by the letter, which Mr. Sibley addressed to the Speaker 
of the House, he does not even know what the exact nature of the 
quarrel is. In his letter, he speaks of his having been charged with 
procuring my assistance for the Standard Oil Company, showing that 
he does not know enough about the matter to know that the contro- 
versy has arisen over the readmission of the Waters-Pierce Oil Com- 
pany. [Sibley doubtless knew they were the same concern in efifect.] 
I have known Mr. Sibley for several years, and 1 never knew a truer, 
or more honest man; and I cannot express my indignation at having 
him assailed before the country as an agent of corruption, simply be- 
cause I happen to enjoy the honor of his friendship." 

The following memorandum concerning Bailey and Sibley was 
furnished the writer by W. O. Davis, of Gainesville, Texas, before 
the charges were filed against Mr. Bailey: "Congressman Sibley, 
of Pennsylvania, I understand, is connected with the Standard Oil 
Company, and since the indictment of the Standard Oil officials in 
Texas, they have doubtless had an eye on Texas affairs. Sibley owned 
a race horse called 'Electic Belle' which cost him about $20,000. He 

transferred this horse to Bailey for love and afifection. , 

of Gainesville, knows about the gift of this horse by Sibley to Bailey." 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 155 

SIBLEY A STANDARD OIL MAN. 

J. P. Gruet, Sr., (Bailey Investigation Committee Report, 1907, 
page 273), testified concerning Mr. Sibley as follows: 

"He was connected with the Perfection Oil Company, a Standard 
Oil Company. This continued during my time with the Waters- 
Pierce Oil Company [from 1890-1905]. I do not know that he has 
ever withdrawn from it." 

BAILEY CONFESSES THAT HE IS A GREAT LAWYER. 

While on the stand, or stump, before the Bailey Suppression 
Committee of 1907 (Committee Report, page 973-974). Colonel 
Jenkins was questioning Mr. Bailey as to why the Standard Oil Com- 
pany would employ him at a fee of $2,500 for an opinion as to whether 
or not they might do business in Texas, when "they had in their con- 
stant employment very able attorneys," Mr. Bailey gave the follow- 
ing self-estimate of his great ability as a lawyer: "It is a contempti- 
ble insinuation that a lot of small lawyers have been filling this State 
with, that I was no lawyer. I practiced law, I was at the head of my 
bar when I was 25 years old. [W. O. Davis, of Gainesville, an at- 
torney of unquestioned veracity, says that Bailey completely frazzled 
out as a lawyer there and ceased from even a pretense of practicing 
law for about a year before he ran for Congress and disposed of his 
law library both because he had no use for it, having no practice, 
and because he had become impecunious in spite of the $100,000 trust 
funds that he had wasted for his aunt and uncle.] * * * My 
standing in the Senate as a lawyer is such that you know and the coun- 
try knows, and to have people suggest because I had not been in the 
court room every day, I was not qualified as a lawyer to advise, is 
rather a singular thing. * * * There has never been an hour 
when my legal opinion on a question of law would not have been 
treated with decent consideration anywhere in this country." 

When Senator Decker was examining Mr. Bailey before the In- 
vestigating Committee of 1901 (House Journal, page 164), Mr. 
Bailey had the following to say concerning his lack of knowledge 
of State afifairs in general and of our anti-trust law in particular: 
"Mr. Decker, I devote myself to the study of Federal questions and 
I do not consider my opinion on State matters entitled to very great 
weight." 

In spite of the above frank admission to the Committee of 1901, 
we find Mr. Bailey saying to the Committee of 1907 (Committee 
Report, page 974), in justification of the Standard Oil Company 
calling on him for an opinion as to State laws: "I think it would be 
rather unusual for any business with large property or large interests 
to venture upon a question or policy of that kind without taking the 
opinion of some lawyer supposed to he especially familiar with the 
laivs of the State in which they sought to operate." This is why, he 
would have us believe, the Standard Oil Company needed other legal 



156 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

advice than from their regularly retained lawyers throughout all of 
the States, including, at that time, Clark & Bolinger of Texas. 

BAILEY AND THE SECURITY OIL COMPANY. 

It is an interesting fact that the Security Oil Company was organ- 
ized at the instance of S. G. Bayne, of New York (connected with 
the Seaboard National Bank and the go-between in the transmission 
of the Waters-Pierce Oil Company dividends to the Standard Oil 
Company), with the assistance of Mr. Bailey and supposedly at the 
insistence of Standard Oil People. This, too, apparently just after 
Bailey advised them that they could not do business in Texas openly. 
In this connection note the following language from Mr. Bailey 
(Investigation Committee, 1907, Report, page 974): "I think the 
Standard Oil Company were in good faith seeking an opinion. 
* * * I think they were, I really think — you know there had been 
a great oil field discovered down here by Beaumont and I think they 
wanted to know if they could safely come here and engage in busi- 
ness. Evidently with the lights now before me, I think what they 
wanted to know was if they could come here and openly engage in 
business." 

This language on Mr. Bailey's part in connection with his ad- 
mitted opinion to the Standard Oil Company for which he received 
a fee of $2,500, indicates very strongly that Mr. Bailey advised them 
that they could not "do business openly," but would have to do it 
covertlv and secretly, under the guise of another corporation — the 
Securitv Oil Company, for example. 

J. P. Gruet (Bailey Investigation Committee Report, 1907, p. 
273), testified: 

I know S. G. Bayne by hearsay. The Seaboard National Bank 
[S. G. Bayne, president] is located next door to 26 Broadway. 

BAILEY DEFENDS THE WATERS-PIERCE OIL COMPANY. 

Mr. Bailey concluded his statement to the Investigation Commit- 
tee of 1901 (House Journal, page 164), with the following words in 
defense of the Southwestern arm of the Standard Oil Company: 
"The men who are attacking it [The Waters-Pierce Oil Company] 
have searched this State in an effort to find a violation of the law by 
this Company without being able to find a single one. [That re- 
mained for Davidson and Lightfoot and the Travis County Jury in 
1907.] I do not believe that these people will ever again willfully 
violate the law. I know that they have issued peremptory instruc- 
tions to their agents to obey all the laws of this State in letter and in 
spirit." 

He must have kept himself well informed with reference to the 
Waters-Pierce Oil Company and its business. 

After inviting "any respectable gentleman in the audience" to ask 
him questions, Mr. Bailey retired from the witness stand before the 
so-called Investigation Committee of 1901, thinking, doubtless, that 
Jhe had won a great triumph and that his then forthcoming exonera- 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 



157 



tion would be the end of the complaint against a servant of the people 
serving the enemies of the people. But such was not to be the case. 

DEMOCRACY VS. TRUSTS. 

The Kansas City platform of the Democratic party, 1900, de- 
clared: "We pledge the Democratic party to unceasing warfare, in 
Nation, State and City, against private monopoly in every form. 
Existing laws against trusts must be enforced and more stringent ones 
must be enacted." Made bold, however, by his brilliant, though 
base escape from the toils of public condemnation in 1900- 1 901, 
Senator Bailey thereafter proceeded with impunity and almost with 
brazenness to engage in the service of the trust masters from which 
he has reaped a rich reward in filthy lucre. As a result, however, 
millions of his fellow countrymen, and especially the poorer classes 
of his constituents, have felt the noiseless and sometimes unseen hand 
of the private monopolist as it has filched, through the faithlessness 
of their "misrepresentative," their scanty earnings and bare existence. 

While Bailey has frequently reveled beneath the glare of wealth 
and luxury with "My dear Pierce," in his handsomely fitted suite of 
eight rooms at the Waldorf-Astoria, New York, unnumbered thou- 
sands of poor, though honest Texans, have sought to educate their 
children, and to teach them "that a man cannot serve two masters," 
by the dim flicker of oil lamps, for which they have paid tribute to 
Bailey and his oil barons. And this is true of the people, who, unable 
to build houses of brick, mortar or stone, must dwell only in shelters 
of shingles and shanties of pine purchased from the lumber trust of 
Bailey's and Kirby's combine. 

TEXAS REPROVED "JOE" IN 1901. 



^J-in 




I gave you fair warning once before, young man. — Indianapolis News. 



158 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 



CHAPTER X. 

SIGNIFICANT POLITICAL DEVELOPMENTS OF 1906— 
ROOSEVELT-BAILEY-ALDRICH AND THE RATE BILL. 

The freedom and vehemence with which Mr. Bailey denounces 
those who differ with him as "liars" was characteristically exhibited 
in Congress, May, 1906, and even the office of President of the United 
States seems to inspire in him no respect for the occupant thereof, 
either politically or from the standpoint of veracity. 

"I think. I am safe in saying that former Senator Chandler wrote 
to a distinguished member of the administration that he and Senator 
Tillman were both suspicious of Senator Bailey and that this letter 
was undoubtedly shown to President Roosevelt himself. [It will be 
remembered that while Senator Tillman at Dallas, Texas, in October, 
1906, told the people of Texas that he had confidence in Senator 
Bailey, yet in the same connection he remarked: "I watched him 
like a hawk." If his confidence was unbounded, why should he have 
"watched" a Senator from Texas "like a hawk?" Texas Senators 
should not require "watching."] In a personal conversation, the 
word was carried from the Tillman camp that Senator Bailey was 
suspected of holding secret conferences with Mr. Aldrich himself, 
and by skilful support of his anti-injunction amendment. Senator 
Bailey had intentionally split up the Democratic caucus and Till- 
man could not deliver anything like the unanimous Democratic vote 
for anything at all, whether approved by the administration or not. 

"That Senator Bailey was under suspicion by Senator Tillman 
and other prominent Democrats is positively known. [Tillman said 
himself that "he watched him like a hawk"] ; that there was some 
ground to believe that he or other prominent Democrats were in con- 
ference with Senator Aldrich almost all the time, and that they were 
being tempted to unite with the Aldrich crowd to down the presi- 
dent [in securing effective railroad rate regulation and preventing 
rebates to the Standard Oil Company and others] is susceptible of 
proof if the distinguished people interested shall see fit to produce 
the documents." — Galveston News, May IJ , IQ06. 

Whether or not Bailey was in secret caucus and league with his 
old Currency-Bill-friend, (of 1903), Aldrich, whose son married a 
daughter of John D. Rockefeller, the author is not sure, but the fol- 
lowing Baileyesque denial strengthens rather than weakens the 
strong suspicion: "I denounce the publication as an unqualified, 
deliberate and malicious lie [malice seems always in his opinion to 
actuate those who disagree with him, whether in Washington or in 
Texas].' I denounce that correspondent as an unqualified, delib- 
erate and malicious liar, whoever he may be and however big the 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 159 

office he holds." — Bailey in a speech to the Senate, Galveston News, 
May ly, I god. 

That Mr. Bailey was greatly agitated was perfectly evident. 
All color had gone from his face and he was sufifering from the strain 
of great emotion. Is it possible he was shuddering lest his whole 
long concealed connection with Standard Oil might thus be ex- 
posed? Later in the day Mr. Bailey exclaimed to the Senate: "It 
seems to me conclusive that this slander proceeds from the White 
House. * * * The miserable wretch who communicated to 
those newspapers and who sought through them to communicate to 
the country a slander on me which people might discuss, rather than 
the issues that have been raised, is unfit for his high office and the 
man who perpetrated that infamy ii'ill pay it ivith his position. 
* * * [Threatened destruction of his opponents began early in 
1906]." 

In commenting on this affair, the Galveston News correspondent 
at Washington states that these charges against Senator Bailey not 
only emanated from the White House but that President Roosevelt 
was dissuaded from verifying them by Secretaries Taft and Root. — 
Galevston News, May IJ , IQ06. 

Whether or not Mr. Bailey secretly supported Aldrich and his 
crowd by trying to divide the Democratic side by offering his anti- 
injunction amendment to the rate bill, will perhaps never be defi- 
nitely known, but Texas deserves a Senator who will so conduct him- 
self as to preclude the possibility of such shadows, suspicions and 
doubts attaching to him. 

bailey's support of the aldrich currency bill in 1903. 

Referring to the Aldrich Currency Measure, of 1903, supported 
bv Bailey alone on the Democratic side. Senator Morgan of Ala- 
bama (and his memory was left to the South as a heritage above re- 
proach or suspicion) said: "In my estimation, it is the most far 
reaching and dangerous measure connected with the finances of the 
country that has been before the Senate since I have been in this 
body. Mr. President, I shall close what I have to say, having spoken 
much longer than I expected, by saying that this is the most danger- 
ous and the most invidious, the most unnecessary and the most un- 
justifiable bill that I have ever spoken to on this floor." (Congres- 
sional Record, pages 3161-3166). 

Senator McLaurin of Mississippi said, concerning this same bill: 

"As I understand this bill, and as it appears to me, it is not a bill 
to give more money to the people of the United States; it will not — 
if my judgment is not at fault — give any money to the people of the 
United States; it takes out of the pockets of the people of the United 
States their money and practically gives it to the banks of the coun- 
try, and not all of the banks, but the favored banks of the country." 
(Congressional Record, March 2, 1903, page 3167.) 

Mr. Patterson, Senator from Colorado, called attention to the fol- 



160 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

lowing quotation from the Evening Star, which he called an Admin- 
istration paper, in full sympathy with the political views and the fi- 
nancial policy of Senator Aldrich: 

"Interest centered about the Senate situation during the early part 
of the day. The question heard on every side was, 'Would the 
Aldrich financial bill pass?' No measure of legislation of recent 
years has excited more attention in Congress than the pending finan- 
cial measure which bears Senator Aldrich's name. Strong pressure 
from influential financial and corporation quarters is being exerted 
upon Congress to get the measure through. The banking interests 
of the East, and therefore of New York, are putting every pound of 
pressure they can bring to bear upon both houses of Congress. This 
is supplemented by pressure from the great railroads of the country, 
whose bonds would be favorably affected by the legislation. The 
only opposition comes from a faction of Democrats." 

Mr. Bryan, in the Commoner, reviewing the measure, said sub- 
stantially that the bill evidenced the fact that the Republican party — 
it being a Republican measure — was still in the grasp of Wall street. 
If he was correct in that conclusion, the inquiry naturally arises, in 
whose grasp was Mr. Bailey, as he and the Republicans were acting 
together on that measure? 

Mr. Bailey's connection with the Aldrich bill has been pointed 
out in reply to his oft-repeated assertions that he had always voted 
right and talked right. To reach the conclusion that he voted right 
and talked right in this instance, one must differ from Senator Mor- 
gan, who described the Aldrich bill, for which Bailey voted and 
talked, as a bill, "the most dangerous, most invidious, the most unnec- 
essary, and the most unjustifiable to which he had ever addressed 
himself on that floor." 

Senator Patterson called attention to the fact that in order to se- 
cure its passage, "strong pressure from influential, financial, and cor- 
poration quarters was being exerted upon Congress to get the meas- 
ure through. The banking interest of the East, and therefore of 
New York, are putting every pound of pressure they can bring to 
bear upon both houses of Congress. This is supplemented by pres- 
sure from the great railroads of the country, whose bonds would be 
favorably affected by the legislation." If Mr. Bailey was right, all 
of these statements must be wrong, and Wall street, and the great rail- 
roads must for once have organized themselves into a committee to 
see how the tribes of men may prosper. 

bailey's boasted pipe line amendment. 

"I helped to make the pipe lines of the Standard Oil Company 
common carriers, and to bring them under the jurisdiction of the In- 
terstate Commerce Commission. [See Bailey's statement in Dallas 
News, of January 4th, 1907]." On June 29, 1906, Mr. Bailey said to 
the Senate: "T myself had nothing to do with bringing them, [the 
pipe lines] within the provisions of the act." 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 161 

Mr. Bailey's speech of June 29th, 1906, discloses this fact very 
clearly: That no pipe lines were afjected by the rate bill, except 
such as had been carrying oil for hire. It is not believed that it can 
be shown that any of the Standard Oil pipe lines have been carrying 
oil for hire and if they do not it is idle for him to say that he imposed 
any burdens on the Standard Oil pipe lines, because he did not. A 
perusal of the Congressional Records at the time will disclose the fact 
that the pipe line provisions were eliminated on account of the clam- 
our raised by the independent oil companies and not by any infl- 
ence of the Standard Oil Company. No one will seriously suppose 
for a moment that if the Standard Oil Company had been opposed to 
bringing pipe lines within the operation of the act (if the act as 
drawn should in fact afifect the company) that it would have been 
done without opposition from Senator Aldrich. The fact that he 
was silent on that proposition proved conclusively that they were not 
involved. 

J. p. GRUET, JR., TESTIFIES ABOUT FAMOUS FLATAU LETTER, ETC. 

J. P. Gruet, Jr., being first duly sworn, testified (Bailey Investi- 
gation Committee Report, 1907, pages 290-312) in part as follows: 

My name is J. P. Gruet, Jr. I was in the employ of the Waters- 
Pierce Oil Company just about nine years, ending about March ist, 
1906. I was employed in the accounting department for a number 
of years, and in the general manager's department, to which I was as- 
signed on January 15th, 1903, by the executive committee. 

CAPTAIN FLATAU VISITS WASHINGTON ON PRIVATE BUSINESS. 

This visit, that Captain Flatau made to Washington, was on some 
business for a concern that both of us were working for, [in the sum- 
mer of 1906] and while he was there I understood that he saw Sen- 
ator Bailey and had a conversation with him. This is what he told 
me. In that conversation [between Bailey and Flatau in Washing- 
ton] I believe there were some remarks made about the articles that 
had been published in the papers against Senator Bailey, and Cap- 
tain Flatau came back and restated this conversation to me in a gen- 
eral way in connection with other matters, business rnatters that we 
talked over, and / thought he might be interested in seeing these 
papers. [The vouchers. And this is the explanation of how the 
Gruets came to show Captain Flatau the vouchers in the first place. 
He was a friend of Senator Bailey originally and was anxious to pro- 
tect the latter as far as he could and also to save the State of Texas a 
scandal. For that reason Captain Flatau voluntarily, after seeing 
the vouchers, offered to write Senator Bailey a friendly letter, not 
in the interest of the Gruets primarily, but in the interest of Mr. 
Bailey himself. Bailey has since been forced, after the author pub- 
lished a copy of the Flatau letter, the original of which Bailey and 
his lawyers pretended was lost, to admit that Captain Flatau's pur- 
pose in writing the letter was a friendly one, so ^ far as Mr. Bailey 



162 Senator J. JV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

was concerned, and not a blackmailing scheme, as Bailey has often 
pretended.] 

In the first place, [continued Mr. Gruet in his testimony,] if I re- 
member correctly, the suggestion as to the writing of this letter did 
not come from us. I think that was Mr. Flatau's own idea, and 
while we did not object to it, we were anxious to have that case set- 
tled, and we thought Mr. Bailey might be induced to use his influ- 
ence with Mr. Pierce to settle it. [This was a frank and truthful 
explanation of the whole matter.] 

At the time the Flatau letter was written, Mr. Flatau expressed 
his feeling towards Senator Bailey as friendly, and I wish to say that 
was my understanding of that letter, and this understanding was con- 
firmed. I am very anxious that Captain Flatau's position in this 
matter be thoroughly understood and if that letter could be pub- 
lished I think that would be very satisfactory. [Bailey had only 
read two or three lines of it to the public and to the House of Repre- 
sentatives in Austin and repeatedly failed to produce the letter before 
the Committee when it was demanded, saying it had been lost or 
could not be found.] 

This conversation I had with Mr. Flatau was mostly about busi- 
ness. He recited the conversation that he had with Mr. Bailey. I 
cannot remember just exactly what it was but the impression I car- 
ried from that talk, was that he was not unfriendly to Mr. Bailey. 
This is simply what he told me, that he had talked with Mr. Bailey 
some on the newspaper reports that had been circulated and when he 
got back to St. Louis he simply looked into them, for reasons, I sup- 
pose, friendly to Mr. Bailey. Mr. Flatau dictated the letter. I was 
not present when he dictated it, nor was my father. I just simply 
showed the papers to Mr. Flatau and told him that they were likely 
to become public. 

BAILEY MEETS CAPTAIN FLATAU IN WASHINGTON. 

The Witness Bailey (continuing on cross-examination p. 981) — 
Mr. Flatau was in Washington and somebody, I think it was 
Congressman Burleson, told me of a conversation he had with a Mr. 
Cowart, and the conversation was, in substance, what I stated in this 
letter, copy of which was read here, my letter to Lightfoot. The 
next day or two I was going to the capitol and I met a gentleman. 
He joined me and walked along a little while and I did not know 
who he was at first, and the question turned on Texas, and I had met 
Mr. Flatau before, and as we walked along a little piece it came to 
me who he was, and I says, "Flatau what kind of a story is this you 
are telling around here?" He told me that he did not intend to do 
anything wrong, but he had heard this and did not suppose there was 
anything in it, and, "Well," I said, "I know there is nothing in it," 
and he said, "Now, when I go back, I will find out. I will see exactly 
what these papers are, I will find out something about it." "Well," 
I said, "all right, it don't concern me, but do as you please about it." 



The Political Lifc-Stury of a Fallen Idol 163 

The thing I had in mind widi Flatau was to find out what the Assist- 
ant Attorney General of this State was doing going around talking 
about matters of that kind against me. If they had anything of that 
kind in their mind, it looks like they owed it to the Democratic 
people of Texas to say it before the primaries, and this was along, it 
must have been the 20th of June, because that letter is written the 21st 
of June and states on yesterday a gendeman told me, and Flatau did 
teli me that Lightfoot was making that talk and he went back and 
wrote me this letter. [Upon receipt of Captain Flatau's letter, 
Bailey immediately wrote Assistant Attorney General Lightfoot and 
Attorney General Davidson assuring them that they were on "a cold 
trail."] 

BAILEY RECEDES FROM BLACKMAIL CHARGE AGAINST CAPTAIN FLATAU. 

In addressing the Thirteenth Texas Legislature on the 17th day 
of January, 1907, while examining the famous Waters-Pierce Oil 
Company documents, Bailey drew from his pocket an alleged letter 
from Captain Flatau, dated St. Louis, Mo., June 26, 1906, from 
which he read the following language: "I have also read the com- 
munications to Mr. Gruet from Texas, wherein they are arranging to 
and trying to get his testimony and have him in Texas in the near 
future in the case against Mr. Pierce, of which I know little." 
(page 874). From the language quoted Mr. Bailey pretended to 
the Legislature that the production of these documents was a black- 
mailing scheme. It is significant that he did not read the whole let- 
ter to the Legislature nor give it to the press. Throughout the en- 
tire investigation the proponent of the charges repeatedly demanded 
of Mr. Bailey's attornevs that they produce the Flatau letter and 
put it into the record in its entirety. They made one excuse, then 
another, and finally they pretended that the letter was lost. The 
proponent of the charges then secured a sworn copy of the letter 
from Captain Flatau himself and introduced it in evidence clearly 
showing that Bailey had been misrepresenting the purpose and con- 
tents of the letter. When Bailey was on "the stump" before the 
Committee, the letter having been already introduced in evidence, 
he was forced to make the following admission. Note the fact that 
this admission was forced from him only about thirty days after he 
had pretended in his speech to the Legislature of January 17th, that 
Captain Flatau had been a party to a blackmailing scheme. Noth- 
ing whatever had occurred in those thirty days to change Bailey's 
opinion as to Captain Flatau's purposes — nothing except the fact that 
the proponent of the charges had procured a certified copy of the 
letter itself and put it in the record which showed conclusively that 
Bailey had been misrepresenting the facts for political capital. 

The witness Bailey (continuing p. 863) — 

Mr. Odell: Now, have you made an exhaustive search for that 
letter up to this time. Senator? 

A. Well, yes, sir; I sorted out all the letters — I have a thousand 



164 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

or probably two thousand letters down there. I didn't go through 
all of them myself, but I had my stenographer there to go through 
one lot of them, I don't know how many. She reported that she 
didn't find the letter. * * * j want to say as a matter of justice 
to Mr. Flatau, that when I first read that letter [June 27, 1906], I 
believed it was an effort to blackmail, and I thought that Mr. Flatau 
was a party to it. I do not think that now. [Why then did he tell 
the 30th Legislature that (on Jan. 17, 1907) it was an effort to black- 
mail?] I think that Flatau was probably trying to do what he 
thought would save political scandal in the State. I understand, and, 
in fact, I know, that he is a Texan, and I think probably he was try- 
ing to do that. Of course, the fact that he exhibited the letter to 
Gruet and his son and that Gruet and his son wanted to use it as a 
means of coercing me to in turn coerce Piercee, is a circumstance that 
the Committee can consider, but my belief is now that Flatau was not 
himself trying to work any blackmail. I did not answer the Flatau 
letter at all, because I thought that he was a party to the scheme. I 
knew they did not have any paper with my name signed to it that 
would embarrass me in the least [because Pierce and Francis had re- 
turned to him his $1,500 draft and his $3,300 receipt for the very 
purpose of returning his signatures^ or that would contradict any- 
thing I had ever said to the people of Texas, and consequently I had 
no apprehension on that score; but if I had known Mr. Flatau was 
thinking to do me a friendly service, or seeking to save the Demo- 
cratic party of this State from a scandal and a feud I would have 
made him a respectful answer to his letter. * * * 

CAPTAIN FLATAU WRITES MR. COCKE, 

St. Louis, February 23, 1907. 
Hon. fVm. A. Cocke, Austin, Texas. 

My Dear Sir: "The circumstance that prompted me to write 
this letter [to Bailey] was that I was in Washington City, to meet 
Mr, Burton, Chairman of the River and Harbor Committee, in be- 
half of the Trinity River Navigation. Before leaving this City, I 
was boasting of Mr. Bailey being superior to any member in Con- 
gress, and I was challenged by Mr. Gruet, and to back up what he 
said to me, he spoke of certain documents that would refute my ideas 
and admiration of Mr. Bailey. He told me of these documents and 
what they were; stating at the time that Mr. Bailey was connected 
with the Waters-Pierce Oil Company, and was their chief adviser, 
and was instrumental in their being allowed to do business in Texas, 
etc. I met Bob Cowart, while in Washington, and I spoke to him 
in regard to what I had learned from Mr. Gruet, Sr., and that I 
knew that notes, vouchers, etc., were in his possession; and I after- 
wards met Mr. Bailey, and he expressed no fears of anything in the 
shape of vouchers or notes in existence that would be of any harm to 
him. 

"After this conversation with the Senator, and on my return 



The Political Life-Story of a fallen Idol 165 

to St. Louis, I demanded of Mr. Gruet, a showing of these papers, 
that I had been in Missouri so long he would have to show me; 
and he did show me. 

"Now, my letter to Mr. Bailey, explains itself, and was written 
by me in good faith as a defense against any idea that he might have 
that I ivas mistaken in my warning. 

"Lone live the good name of TEXAS and the Democratic major- 
ityl L. S. Flatau." 

FLATAU'S FAMOUS LETTER TO BAILEY. 

(Com. Kept., p. 994.) 

St. Louis, June 26, 1906. 

"J. W. Bailey, Washington, D. C. 

"My Dear Sir: Recalling my conversation with you while in 
Washington this week, and wherein you somewhat censured me, or 
insinuated as much, in regard to the report that I had heard was 
afloat wherein you were interested, I want to say that my conversation 
with Colonel Bob Cowart was strictly and merely an inquiry as to 
what the reports meant that were being circulated against you. 

"During this conversation with him and while 1 thought it was 
public, I meant no less friendship for you or interest in Texas' 
representative. 

"Now, after returning home, I felt it my duty (and perhaps it 
would be of importance to you at the same time), I undertook, to in- 
vestigate the facts that might connect you with the Waters-Pierce 
Oil Company, Mr. Pierce in particular. And as circumstances so 
gave me the opportunity, I called on Mr. J. P. Gruet, who is the 
father of our secretary, so as to satisfy myself in regard to the truth of 
any evidence that might come up wherein it would be harmful to you. 
Now, you know I have no 'axe to grind,' nothing to expect from your 
hands or through your influence, because of your high position, there 
fore I give you this information and assure you that it would be as 
private and as personal as can be. It may be of importance to you 
and it may not; I can not say; but from what I have heard and from 
what I have seen and read it appears to me that it would be well for 
you to stop this procedure wherein you will be implicated in transac- 
tions that the people of Texas might construe far beyond what they 
really amount to. I have read letters and many other prima facie 
documents that were shown me by J. P. Gruet, that look very bad 
for your interests. They no doubt will have Mr. Gruet in Texas, as 
I have read communications from the head of certain departments in 
that State wherein they hope to arrange matters for his appearance, 
and as a friend I would advise you to check this movement at once 
and it can be done by Mr. Pierce. I have learned through business 
connections that Mr. Hawes' firm are the attorneys for Mr. Gruet. 
"Now, you can take this as you please and for what it is worth. I 
am only giving it to you, as I know it to be after perusing the docu- 
ments that would be very detrimental to your high standing. This 



166 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

can be checked by Mr. Pierce if he will and your influence with him 
should be brought to bear on this matter, and I know that it can be 
accomplished, that is, if you deem it worthy of such action. I would 
never have taken this matter up had I not have met you as I did and 
the conversation that took place between us, because I felt that it 
was merely a report, and I wanted to inquire into the facts in the 
matter. Now, I love Texas just as well as you do and take as much 
interest in her representatives as any other Texan, and feel enough in- 
terest in you to write this letter in the feeling that I try to impress. 
No one as yet but myself knows anything of these facts as I have nar- 
rated them to you, or could give you the warning that I give, with- 
out price of any kind. 

"Hoping that you will consider this for what it is worth, if it be 
worth anything at all, I am as I have always been, 

Yours, L. S. Flatau." 

BAILEY WRITES LIGHTFOOT AND DAVIDSON THAT "ALL IS WELL." 

Immediately after Captain Flatau had met Bailey in Washing- 
ton and warned him, as a friend and to save Texas a political scan- 
dal, Bailey hastened to write Assistant Attorney General Lightfoot 
and Attorney General Davidson reassuring letters. Although Mr. 
Bailey has since bitterly complained that they should have made 
their exposures prior to the Democratic Primaries of July 28, 1906, 
they did not come into possession of the incriminating documents 
until November of the same year. Then, too, Bailey advised them 
on June 21, 1906, about a month before the Primaries, that the ru- 
mors that were then gaining currency connecting him with having re- 
ceived money from the Waters-Pierce Oil Company were "abso- 
lutely false." But to quote Mr. Bailey's own testimony — 

The witness Bailey (continuing. Committee Report, p. 861) — 

Q. When did you first have information by rumor or otherwise 
of the possession of these vouchers and documents that have been 
submitteed to the committee here by Gruet? 

A. Well, I can refer to a letter here. I can tell — I can not fix 
the exact date, but I know it was before the date of this letter — it was 
before June 21st, 1906 (consulting a letter.) 

Q. Now, that information, Senator, how was it conveyed to 
you ; by letter or otherwise? 

A. Well, this letter here shows that it was on the 20th of June 
that I first learned of it. This is a letter or a copy of a letter that I 
wrote to Jewel P. Lightfoot. It is dated the 21st of June, 1906, 
and begins: "Yesterday a gentleman [Capt. Flatau] told me that 
some one had represented to you — " so that shows that it was a per- 
sonal conversation and that it was the day before. 

Q. I wish you would read that letter to Mr. Lightfoot, Senator, 
please, sir. 

A. This letter is dated Washington, June 21, 1906. "Hon. 
Jewel P. Lightfoot, Austin, Texas. My Dear Sir: Yesterday a 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 167 

gentleman told me that some one had represented to you that either I 
had given my notes to the Waters-Pierce Oil Company or that the 
Waters-Pierce Oil Company had given its notes to me, and that the 
transaction had some connection with the readmission of the Waters- 
Pierce Oil Company to Texas. It is immaterial whether this party 
stated I had given my notes to the Waters-Pierce Oil Company or 
it had given its notes to me, because either statement is absolutely 
false. I have never received any note from nor given any note to the 
Waters-Pierce Oil Company, nor have I ever received any money 
from it or paid any money to it. I am sending a copy of this letter 
to Attorney General Davidson. Very truly yours." 

And on the same day here is a copy of a letter to Attorney Gen- 
eral Davidson, dated Washington, D. C, June 21, 1906, addressed 
to Honorable R. V. Davidson, Austin, Texas. "My Dear Mr. 
Davidson" or "My Dear Davidson," it reads, "I herewith enclose 
you copy of a letter to Mr. Lightfoot which will explain itself. Very 
truly yours." 

Q. Did you ever have any reply to either of those letters? 

A. Never. 

BAILEY FOR BROOKS. WHY? 

Gainesville, Texas, July 14, 1906. 

"I want to appeal to you today to help Judge Brooks to be Gov- 
ernor of Texas, because he helped me to be Senator. He is not a 
better man than the rest of those who are seeking the office, but he is 
as good as the best of them, and while none of them could see their 
way clear to help me to be Senator, he did. He has a brother who, if 
anything, is a better man than he is, and I don't think I have a better 
friend in Texas than this brother of his. These are the reasons, my 
fellow citizens, why I ask you to help Judge Brooks." — Galveston 
News, July IS, IQO6. 

The foregoing is a fair illustration of Mr. Bailey's supreme ego- 
tism and over-balancing selfconceit. Even the Governorship of 
Texas is to this ego-maniac a readily convertible asset for the repay- 
ment of his political debts. 

H. CLAY PIERCE ARRESTED IN ST. LOUIS AND FORCED TO TESTIFY. 
(Dallas News, September 11, 1906.) 
"St. Louis, Mo., Sept. 10. H. Clay Pierce, Chairman of the ex- 
ecutive board of the Waters-Pierce Oil Company, was arrested here 
today on an attachment issued and served a week ago to compel his 
attendance as a witness in a civil suit. From the sheriff's office Mr. 
Pierce was taken before C. B. Allen, Commissioner of the St. Louis 
Circuit Court, who had issued the attachment. 

"The case upon which the attachment was issued is a suit brought 
by John P. Gruet, a former secretary, for salary." 

1-13 



168 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

PIERCE RELATES CONNECTION WITH STANDARD OIL. 

As a result of his arrest Pierce was forced to testify, in the suit 
instituted by Gruet against him, and among other things said: 

"When in 1878 1 organized the first Waters- Pierce Oil Company 
its predecessors, Waters-Pierce & Co., and H. Clay Pierce & Co., 
had already established business in all the territory in which the 
present Waters-Pierce Oil Company now operates, and it was agreed 
and understood between myself and the representatives of the Stand- 
ard Oil Company of Ohio, I think — at least it was the only Standard 
Oil Company that I knew as being in existence at that time — that 
the first Waters-Pierce Oil Company would confine its operations 
and transact its business within the certain territory in which the 
Waters-Pierce & Co. and H. C. Pierce & Co, had established their 
business. In other words, the Waters-Pierce Oil Company organ- 
ized in 1878 was to take over the business of Waters, Pierce & Co. 
In pursuance of this understanding certain lines were agreed upon 
in Illinois which comprised parts, I think, of Madison, St. Clair 
County, including East St. Louis. The line was then in the State of 
Missouri and commenced at a point just south of Hannibal, on the 
west bank of the Mississippi River, and run according to county 
lines southwest to the western border of Missouri, bordering upon 
Kansas. Also the State of Arkansas and what is now Indian Terri- 
tory and Oklahoma, Texas, all of Louisiana, west of the Mississippi 
River, and the Republic of Mexico. 

Q. Has there been any change in the territory since it was then 
established? 

A. There has not. 

Q. From what source did the Waters-Pierce Oil Company ob- 
tain its supplies of refined oils at that time? 

A. Almost exclusively from the Standard Oil Company. 

Q. And from what sources has it since that time obtained its 
supplies of refined oil? 

A. Almost exclusively from the Standard Oil Company and its 
allied interests. 

PIERCE TESTIFIES ABOUT CONNECTION WITH SENATOR BAILEY. 

"St. Louis, Mo.. Sept. 15. * * * The testimony of Pierce 
brought out his close relationship with the young statesman from 
Texas, and was a reminder of the fact that Senator Bailey had rend- 
ered Pierce valuable services in 1900 in procuring a license for the 
Waters-Pierce Oil Company to do business in that State after its 
original license had been revoked for violation of the anti-trust stat- 
utes. 

"The testimony of Pierce with reference to Bailey's connection 
with the Tennessee properties follows: 

" 'Immediately after Mr. Gruet's employment on March 28, ef- 
fective April I, 1905,' he said, 'Mr. Gruet came to New York to see 



The Political Life-Story of a fallen Idol 169 

me, at the suggestion of Mr. Johnson, and I told Mr. Gruet that the 
affairs of the Tennessee Central Railway Company, the Tennessee 
Construction Company, the Briar Hill Collieries and the Cumber- 
land Coal Company — the latter two being interests of the Tennessee 
Construction Company — required investigation; and, as I had 
placed my interest in the matter — which was large in amount — in 
the hands of Senator Bailey of Texas, with power of attorney for me 
to handle them as he saw fit, (I not having the time to give my per- 
sonal attention to them), I wished Mr. Gruet to place himself at the 
disposal of Senator Bailey and make such investigation into the iter- 
ests mentioned as Senator Bailey desired. 

"'Mr. Gruet went over to Nashville, under instructions from 
Senator Bailey, and remained there some time. 

" 'He returned to St. Louis and was elected there by Senator 
Bailey, who had charge of the companies, president of the Briar Hill 
Collieries Company, and, I am not sure, but I think he was made a 
director and president, and I think he was given some official posi- 
tion in connection with the Cumberland Coal Company and also the 
Tennessee Construction Company. 

" 'I don't now recall, but probably within a week, Senator Bailey 
came over, and in the meantime I had given Mr. Gruet a room in my 
office there. As I recall now it was the office of President Rob- 
inson of the Mexican Central Railroad, who makes his head-quar- 
ters in the City of Mexico and only occupies the office upon the few 
occasions when he reaches New York. 

"On cross-examination Pierce again referred to Senator Bailey's 
employment in connection with the Tennessee corporations, and es- 
timated his interest in the properties at $13,000,000. 

" 'I assigned Gruet to Senator Bailey,' he continued, 'to do work 
in connection with the auditing and investigating of the affairs of the 
Tennessee Central Railway, the Tennessee Construction Company 
and allied interests.' 

" 'That being a matter in which you were interested,' said Attor- 
ney Johnson, 'and which Senator Bailey was looking after as your 
attorney?' 

" 'I was vitally interested in it,' said Pierce, 'to an extent which 
would oblige my taking over the entire business amounting to over 
$13,000,000, and because I did not have time to give attention to it, 
1 had employed Senator Bailey to take charge of the entire matter.' " 

COMMENT. 

It was largely as a result of the foregoing testimony that "The 
Bailey Question" became acute in Texas politics in the fall of 1906, 
after Mr. Bailey had been perfunctorily endorsed as the Democratic 
nominee for the United States Senate from Texas in the previous 
primaries of July 28. The testimony of Pierce was a revelation to 
the people of Texas. So much so, in fact, as to cause a wave of in- 
dignation to sweep over the State. It appeared to many that this 



170 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

intimate connection between Pierce and Bailey, involving vast mil- 
lions, was indicative also of a connection between the Texas Senator 
and the Oil Masters in 1900. 

Then it was that public sentiment was so crystalized for and 
against Mr. Bailey as to result in the Crane-Bailey Houston Debate, 
October 6, 1906, in which General M. M. Crane of Dallas, so vigor- 
ously contended for proper standards of public service, and in which 
Mr. Bailey displayed his qualities as a public speaker and as one who 
can successfully avoid the real issue in any discussion by invoking the 
charm of his own personality and by setting up straw men to distract 
the public attention from himself. 

The growing opposition to Senator Bailey at this juncture had 
been increased, indeed, had its inception, perhaps, not so much 
through the exposures contained in the Cosmopolitan articles pub- 
lished in July and August, 1906, as through the circular of the Hous- 
ton Good Government Club, of which Hon. H. F. Ring was presi- 
dent, entitled "The Shame of Texas," and through the Texas editorial 
comment which followed. 

bailey's doctrine, (before his exposure.) 

In this connection it is interesting to note the following from 
Senator Bailey himself: "I was never the retained attorney for any 
corporation, because I always reserve the right to accept or reject 
each case upon its merits. I never had twenty cases for a corporation 
in all my practice before or since I entered the public service. I 
never represented the Waters-Pierce Oil Company or any monopoly 
in my life. When they say a man in public life has no right to prac- 
tice law for a trust, they raise no argument with me. I not only join 
them, but I go further. I say that no man in public or private life 
has a right to represent a trust, because it is an unlawful undertaking, 
nor to aid by his legal skill any man or corporation in evading the 
laws of the land." — (Fort Worth Record, Oct. 10, 1906.) 

Remember that Mr. Bailey was afterwards forced to admit, on 
cross-examination, that he had received at least one fee of $2,500 
direct from the Standard Oil Company. 

After all that has been said and written on this subject, the fol- 
lowing estimate of Mr. Bailey's career and conduct, his possibilities 
and his shortcomings, which concluded the Cosmopolitan Magazine 
article, has proven as true an history, as it was then an accurate 
prophecy: 

"The Cosmopolitan has a strong inclination to side with Senator 
Bailey against himself. He is young, he had brains, and he knows 
the right, though he may scorn it in the spurious wisdom he has ac- 
quired in the quest of wealth and the sort of support that is given 
him in the kind of Senate of which he has risen to a leadership, which 
dishonors his character. He is not too old to retrieve himself, could 
he climb to the Jeffersonian heights, where, as a politician, he pre- 
tends to dwell. // he would love riches less and honest poverty more. 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 171 

he would be the man that nature intended him to be. Environment 
and an ambition that has not been illumined and guided by moral 
light have led him into w^ays of which his natural self would be 
ashamed. With a theme congenial to him he can rouse the Senate 
with his eloquence and stamp his individuality upon the mind of the 
country. He is not a Gorman or a Quay, however hard he may try 
in a discreditable and pitiable cynicism to be both. // is his powers 
of mind and expression that have caused the "interests" to regard him 
as worth capture, and the "interests," like Walpole, are of the opinion 
that every man has his price. Men of sanity, who are men with a 
just estimate of the value of the prizes of life, sorrow when a Bailey 
sells himself for a mess of pottage — corporation pottage, that takes 
the form of political influence and farms and race horses and a ready 
paying teller when checks for poker losses are presented. It is a 
misfortune to the country larger than any personal one, when a man 
of mind and energy in public office goes wrong. He may for a time 
deceive the people when he abandons the standard of uprightness, 
but he does not fool his closer neighbors." 
And such a pity " 'tis, 'tis true!" 

"a standard oil dodge. 

"Tulsa, I. T., Oct. 12. By combining with John W. Gates, will 
pipe oil to Port Arthur from Tulsa. Information was received here 
today direct from the New York office of John W. Gates to the effect 
that the Standard Oil Company and the Gates oil interests in Texas 
have combined and will build a pipe line from the Tulsa fields to the 
Gates refineries at Port Arthur, Texas. 

"Gates will build north and the Standard south, the two lines con- 
necting on Red River, near Paris, Texas. 

"The laws governing corporations in Texas prohibit the Standard 
Oil Company from doing business in that State, and for that reason 
the coalition with Gates was made. Gates controls a larger percen- 
tage of the Texas oil refineries and has a large market for crude oil." 
— Galveston News, Oct. I J. 

Cleburne, Texas, October 15th, 1906. (Galveston News, Oct. 
16). Mr. Bailey said: "He was not sure whether he returned di- 
rect to Texas or went over to Lexington, Kentucky. If he went by 
Lexington he stated it was for the purpose of seeing his horses." 

"Quoting from a letter which he claimed to have written to Hon. 
C. K. Bell, then Attorney General, dated Gainesville, Texas, August 
3, 1901, 'My present opinion is that the company's failure to file the 
affidavit is the result of an oversight, and that it has no intention of re- 
sisting the requirements of the statute.' " Mr. Bailey has always 
been found as an apologist for the company ever since he bade them 
"wash their hands." 



172 Senator J. W . Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

BAILEY DEMANDS RESIGNATION OF STATE SENATOR SENTER. 

Dallas, Texas, Dec. 17th, 1906. (Galveston News, Dec. i8th.) 
"Senator Bailey, himself, telephoned from Gainesville that he hoped 
his Dallas friends would demand Mr. Senter's resignation." 

SENATOR SENTER'S REPLY. 

Senator Senter replied to this suggestion by calling attention to 
the fact that Mr. Bailey had been quoted as willing to have the con- 
troversy referred to the Democratic voters of Dallas and Rockwall 
counties, and concluded his proposition as follows: "Let a primary 
be held in which only Democrats shall participate to vote upon a 
ticket containing two propositions: one 'for Bailey'; the other 
'against Bailey.' * * * If a majority declare for Mr. Bailey I 
shall retire from the Senate. If the majority declare against him, he 
is to retire from the race for United States Senator. * * * The 
people are entitled to choose the next Senator with full knowledge of 
all the facts which may or should afifect their judgment." This pro- 
position was declined by Mr. Bailey and he continued to demand 
resignations from all members of the Legislature who were not will- 
ing to vote for him as "the nominee," right or wrong, innocent or 
guilty. The Author always regarded this efTort on Mr. Bailey's 
part as a political scheme to rid the Legislature in advance of the 
meeting thereof, of those members who desired an investigation, and, 
consequently in advance of any opportunity on the part of the 
people to have his conduct investigated that would enable the people 
to ever intelligently pass upon the issues. If Mr. Bailey and his 
henchmen could have thus secured resignations and reannounce- 
ments before his conduct was investigated, he would likely have car- 
ried most of the elections and thus the investigation that was after- 
wards forced, would have been thwarted and he would have gone 
"scot free" for all time to come, except for an occasional dissenter 
here and there. "For ways that are dark and tricks that are vain," 
for duplicity and artfulness in deceiving the people, this dark-vis- 
aged, white-eyed, astute Mississippi-Texas trickster, has had few, if 
any, equals. 

It is a poor rule that has no exceptions. Blind partisanship, 
under the guise of party loyalty, so-called, has leagued itself with the 
corrupting influences of powerful political machines in many of the 
cities and some of the states of this Union. But little have we hereto- 
fore dreamed that the dragon of graft would seek to fasten its greedy 
and gapping jaws on the State of Texas and then find justification, 
vindication and "exoneration" by labeling itself "a Democratic 
nominee." 

The existence of one political party, presupposes the existence 
of other like parties within the State, and this condition is necessary 
in a government of political parties. Minority parties, have rights, 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 173 

however, that should and must be respected by the dominant party, 
or such party will not deserve nor permanently receive the support of 
a majority of the people. 

The republicans, the Socialists, and every other political sub- 
division of the people, have a right to expect, yea even to demand, of 
the democratic majority in Texas, that we elect, not men possessing 
other political views than ourselves, but men out of our own ranks 
at least honest and truthful. Members of a State legislature repre- 
sent all the people of their State — not a part of them — and under 
their official oaths, they owe it to both their State and the nation, as 
well as to their party, to elect United States Senators of their own po- 
litical faith, but Senators measuring up to the ordinary standards of 
common honesty. 

There is nothing sacred about a party nominee — at least not so 
to the democratic "Rogues" of Texas. Party principles and party 
policies should be faithfully supported. On questions of official in- 
tegrity and veracity there should be no division between parties; all 
should stand on a common level. The party nominee who urges his 
nomination as against seriously developed after questions involving 
his official character and fidelity, who uses the party lash, and says 
that he may do with impunity what ordinary men may not do without 
violating their official consciences, is afraid of his own record, or an 
Egomaniac — possibly both. 

Hon. William J. Bryan maintains the doctrine that a man's duty 
to his country is always higher than his duty to any party in that coun- 
try. That is patriotism, not partisanship; the position of an honest 
patriot, not the spurious bombast of a dishonest egotist. 

Query: Which is the most straightforward course: To ad- 
vocate the investigation of corrupt practices exposed subsequent to a 
nomination, or for a nominee after his election to forsake the people 
— and pocket the proceeds? Under such circumstances, the public 
servant will certainly fool the people, or the despoilers of the people 
who pay him his price expecting to get value received. He cannot 
"deliver the goods" to both parties to the transaction. 

BAILEY AT COMANCHE, TEXAS. 

Comanche, Texas, December i8th, (Galveston, News, December 
19th), 1906. Referring to the $1,500 draft which he himself had 
destroyed, and concerning which he ofifered to resign "if they would 
produce such a draft," Mr. Bailey asked, "Ought they not resign un- 
less they do produce it or trace it through the banks? * * * If 
they can prove [the draft] it will convict me of a falsehood. Bring 
on the draft and convict me of a falsehood." 

Bailey knew they could not produce it or trace it because he, him- 
self, had gotten it back and destroyed it. 

"Then they bring up a loan of $8,000. I borrowed that; it is not 
all I borrowed; I have borrowed much money. * * * That 



174 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

$8,000 note was dated March ist, 1901. Do you suppose if it had been 
a fee [for the readmission in 1900, he means] 1 would have waited a 
year to collect it from a $30,000,000 corporation?" 

Answer: No; but what business had he borrowing $8,000 for 
lobbying before the Texas Legislature in 1901, to defeat legislation 
inimical to the interests of the company? And why should he bor- 
row $8,000 under any circumstances from a $30,000,000 corporation 
which was not in the business of money lending? 

BAILEY AT DE LEON, TEXAS. 

De Leon, Texas, December 19, (Galveston News, December 
20th,) 1906. — "Bank endorsements are not on the draft and this at 
once' exposes the forgeries. You see the injustice which Davidson 
committed by refusing to let me see the papers so I could not answer 
them as they are. 

"The Waters-Pierce Oil Company did not charge it [$3,300] to 
expense * * * but to bills receivable. Now I ask the Cashier 
again, isn't it true that when a document or bill is charged to bills 
receivable it is treated as an existing valid demand?" 

The trick of it was, however, that they carried Bailey's $3,300 
due bill in bills receivable until it was due and then charged it off to 
legal expenses and afterwards to profit and loss. 

BAILEY AT DUBLIN, TEXAS— HORNET'S NEST. 

Dublin, Texas, Dec. 21, (Galveston News, Dec. 22nd), 1906.— 
During a public address by Mr. Bailey, the following interesting 
dialogue took place : 

DECLARES THEM FORGERIES. 

"I [Bailey] understand you have a citizen here who says 'Why 
did Pierce send that telegram authorizing a draft and to have me 
quiet Texas parties?' 

''That telegram is a forgery, just like the draft is a forgery. They 
don't claim that the telegram was sent to me but to some one else. 
The telegram was dated June 12, and the draft June 15. They forged 
the telegram to lay the predicate for forging the draft, but I have 
caught them by calling upon them to show the bank's endorsements, 
or the bank record. [The draft and the telegram were afterwards 
proven genuine.] 

"Somehow God has so created the universe that a lie cannot pre- 
vail. They simply tried to forge too much." 

A little later Senator Bailey invited any one present who desired 
information concerning the Waters-Pierce transaction to ask him 
questions promising civil answers, and declaring that if they wouldn't 
ask him while here they ought not to ask "his friends" when he had 
gone. "Can you not legally force Attorney-General Davidson to 
show you those papers?" asked H. A. Groos. 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 175 

"No, sir," Senator Bailey answered. "I cannot legally do so, but 
if Davidson had not filed an amendment in that case at Austin that 
forced a continuance he would have had to produce them in court, 
but the case has been continued until March. / will be elected to the 
Senate in January and then you will hear no more about that forged 
draft. And in God's name is a Democrat from Texas compelled to 
resort to law to make a Democratic Attorney-General treat him 
decently?" 

FAUST ASKED QUESTIONS. 

A little later C. G. Faust, a business man of Dublin, arose in the 
rear of the hall and claimed the Senator's attention. 

"I am one of the men you referred to in regard to that telegram 
from Wisconsin," said Mr. Faust. "Did you say that that telegram 
is a forgery? Is that right?" 

Senator Bailey: Yes. Well, of course, I cannot say positively 
because that telegram did not come to me. It does not purport to 
have come to me. / can say positively that the draft is a forgery be- 
cause it is said to be signed by me. I know that the draft which is 
supposed to be based on the telegram is a forgery. Hence I believe 
that the telegram is a forgery. 

Mr. Faust: I want to ask if you have ever conferred with Mr. 
Pierce and asked him if the telegram is a forgery. 

Senator Bailey: No, sir, I have not consulted with Mr. Pierce 
about anything in this connection. I did not confer with him about 
the letter which he sent to me saying that he had told me that the 
Waters-Pierce Oil Company was an independent corporation. He 
wrote that letter of his own accord. I have in my papers a telegram 
from Mr. Pierce saying that I had not received a dollar direct or 
indirectly from the Waters-Pierce Oil Company and stating that I 
held his receipt for the $8,000 paid him to take up my note, which 
note was lost at the time of payment. I have never read this telegram 
where I addressed the people nor did I give it out to the public. It 
was given to the newspapers up there. 

Mr. Faust: Did you know whether he was in the place in Wis- 
consin at the time? 

Senator Bailey: No, sir, I don't keep up with his movements 
cither in the summer nor in the winter time. 

Mr. Faust: Do you know where you were on June 15, the day 
this draft was purported to have been signed? 

MAN WHO SAYS IT IS A LIAR. 

Senator Bailey: No; but I do know that the man who says I 
signed that draft is a liar. 

Mr. Faust: I am not making that charge. 

Senator Bailey : I know you are not. 

Mr. Faust: Well, you are getting pretty close to me. 

Senator Bailey: Then you should not get so close to the lie. 



176 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

Mr. Faust: But, Mr. Bailey, I am getting pretty close to you 
I think you said you would give me a civil answer. 

Senator Bailey: I said I was going to be civil to you and I am. 

Mr. Faust: Be so then; you were shooting close to me. 

Senator Bailey: Well, I am going to be civil to you now, but 
I would not like for any man to say that to my face when I go down- 
stairs. 

Mr. Faust: Do you know where you were on that June 15? 

Senator Bailey: No; do you? 

Mr. Faust: No, but I could find out. 

Senator Bailey: / could, too, if it were important. 

Mr. Faust: This seems important enough to take you out of the 
halls of Congress. 

Senator Bailey: Yes, sir; but none of the miserable wretches 
have the courage to run against me. 

Mr. Faust: Somewhere in this correspondence it is alleged that 
you told Pierce to send you exchange in your name so that he would 
not have to indorse it. Why was that? 

Senator Bailey: Because I needed the money at once and did 
not want any delay in the sending of it. 

Mr. Faust: Will you ask the banker here whether or not Mr. 
Pierce's check payable to you, or a draft payable to him and indorsed 
by you, would have suffered any more delay in being collected than 
a draft in your name? 

KNEW PIERCE'S HABITS. 

Senator Bailey: I don't need to ask the banker. I knew Mr. 
Pierce's business habits. / have seen checks lie on his desk a week 
waiting for him to sign them. That was exactly what would have 
happened about this draft. This $1,750 was a part of the $8,000 note 
I had borrowed. I had written for this money before, as that letter 
shows. My request was purely in the interest of economy of time. Is 
there a man here who believes that if a man was getting money wrong- 
fully he would have written the letters about it all? 

Mr. Faust: It seems that Mr. Pierce had the time to get the ex- 
change from the bank and gave his check for it. 

Senator Bailey: Yes, sir, but do you suppose that had I been 
afraid for Pierce to sign his name to the check that I would have 
signed my name to the letter to him requesting him to send me the 
money? 

Mr. Faust: You have been pretty close to Pierce. 

Senator Bailey: You see, he applauds himself. I want to say 
to the people here that / transacted many million dollars' worth of 
business with H. C. Pierce in my time. Every dollar of that busi- 
ness, however, was transacted before I discovered the connection be- 
tween the Waters-Pierce Oil Company and the Standard Oil Com- 
pany. Do you suppose that Pierce would have trusted me to transact 
$20,000,000 of business for him unless he had confidence in me? 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 177 

And do you suppose he would have employed me if he thought I had 
betrayed my constituents? Now, 1 want to ask Mr. Faust a question. 
Have you always voted the Democratic ticket? 
Mr. Faust. / have. 

STATE DEMOCRATIC COMMITTEE SHIELDS BAILEY. 

Dallas, Texas, October i6th, (Galveston News, October 17th), 
1Q06. — At a meeting of the State Democratic Executive Committee 
presided over by Mr. Bailey's Illinois importation Mr. George A. 
Garden, a resolution was introduced endorsing Chairman Garden in 
the matter of his recent letter to the Democracy of Texas, urging 
them to desist from further agitation of the Bailey matter. Hardly 
had the resolution been read when J. M. Edwards, of Tyler, offered 
a substitute declaring that the Democrats had at all times the right 
"to consider, discuss and criticise the records and conducts of their 
representatives in Congress and their public servants," declaring 
these rights to be fundamental and essential to the welfare of the rank 
and file of the party and that it could not be "abridged or stifled" by 
the committee or its chairman. The resolution was concluded with 
the statement that the committee and its chairman would be without 
jurisdiction to "control the views or action of the sovereign Demo- 
crats of Texas with reference to the record or conduct of Senator 
Bailey, or with reference to his re-election; that it would be im- 
politic, unwise and futile for this committee to take any action which 
is intended or which may be construed as an effort so to do." 

Mr. Bailey's partisans on the committee insisted upon their mo- 
tion, whereupon the Committee went into executive session anJ the 
representatives of the press were excluded from the counsels of ihe 
Democracy of Texas, while the politicians conspired in secrecy to 
shield a Standard Oil Senator. 

Mr. Garden, formerly of Chicago, was asked if he did not think 
the rank and file of the party were entitled to know all that the State 
committee did. He replied: "I think that this is purely a matter of 
party proceedure and being so, it occurred to me to be the proper 
thing to do. * * * I do not think that members of the party have 
a right to know all the business it transacts. We do not care to fur- 
nish campaign material for the opposition party," as though an oppo- 
sition party could hurt the Democratic ticket in Texas. It was not the 
"opposition party" that Mr. Garden wanted to keep in the dark, but 
the honest Democracy of Texas who had a right to know all the facts 
concerning their Senator. 

PROPOSED REVOCATION OF ABOVE COMMITTEE ACTION. 

On December 16, 1906, (Galveston News, December 17th), Hon. 
C. M. Smithdeal, member of the State Democratic Executive Com- 
mittee, addressed a letter to Mr. George A. Garden complaining of 
the action of the Committee in October in declaring "behind closed 
doors and in executive session that Joseph W. Bailey was the nominee 



178 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

of the Democracy in Texas for United States Senator." Attention 
was called to the fact that at that time "it was not known by the Com- 
mittee that he had received from H. Clay Pierce various sums of 
money at the time he aided in the readmission of the Waters-Pierce 
Oil Company and afterwards." Mr. Smithdeal continued, "If the 
executive committee at that time had authority to declare him the 
nominee it has at this time the authority to declare him unfit, by rea- 
son of his admitted relation with the Waters-Pierce Oil Company, 
to represent the people of Texas in the National Congress. * * * 
It acted without knowledge of all the facts. If the committee had 
that power, it has the power now to say whether it is the duty of 
Democrats to support him in view of the disclosures made since the 
primaries and in view of Senator Bailey's admissions." The letter 
concluded with a demand that the Chairman call the State Executive 
Committee together to consider the matter prior to the convening of 
the Legislature. This appeal, however, fell upon unresponsive ears. 
Mr. Carden refused so to do, which refusal elicited the following 
strong letter: 

COMMITTEEMAN SMITHDEAL TO STATE CHAIRMAN CARDEN. 

Hillsboro, Texas, December 31, (Dallas News, January 2), 1907. 
— Hon. George Carden, Chairman State Democratic Executive Com- 
mittee: Dear Sir: Your letter to me, published in the Dallas News, 
and dated Dec. 29, was received today. You decline to grant my re- 
quest to convene the State Executive Committee, and I presume that 
it is useless for me to pursue the matter further. However, I cannot 
refrain from calling attention to what seems to me to be your incon- 
sistent attitude with reference to the power of the Committee. 

You state that Mr. Bailey is the nominee for United States Sena- 
tor; that the State Committee could not give additional force to that 
nomination, nor could it declare him not the nominee. After the 
State Convention adjourned, and at the very beginning of the present 
political agitation, you, as chairman, addressed a communication to 
the Democracy of Texas, enjoining further discussion of Senator 
Bailey's alleged transgressions. When the State Committee met, pur- 
suant to call, in October of the present year, Mr. Edwards, of Tyler, 
offered a resolution to the efifect that the committee was without juris- 
diction to declare Senator Bailey the nominee of the party. You held 
the proxies of some absent members and voted them against the Ed- 
wards resolution. If you, as Chairman of the Committee, had the 
authority to advise the Democracy of this State, certainly the whole 
committee would have as much authority. If the Edwards resolution 
embodied your views with reference to the powers of the committee 
it is difficult for me to understand why you voted against it. I did 
not question your sincerity, but I confess to some curiosity to know 
what has caused you to change your views. 

I have not contended at any time that the Executive Committee 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 179 

could annul any act of the State Convention or declare void the re- 
sults of the primary election, but I have said, and now say, that dis- 
closures made since the adjournment of the convention have brought 
about much discussion and caused great dissatisfaction among Dem- 
ocrats concerning the United States Senatorship, and that it would be 
entirely proper and timely for the State Committee to take cogzi- 
nance of the situation and discuss it in the interest of the party. 

A great crisis confronts the Democracy of Texas. The paramount 
question is not whether Senator Bailey shall win a personal triumph, 
but whether the Democracy shall abandon its ideals, the principles 
which have caused it to survive long after its illustrious founder 
passed away, and dedicate itself unreservedly to the furtherance of 
one man's political fortunes, regardless of consequences to the people. 

The condition in which we find ourselves today is anomalous, if 
not entirely unprecedented. A United States Senator has been 
charged with flagrant wrongs against the rights of the people whom 
he was chosen to represent. From his own lips has been forced a con- 
fession which should convince; yet because the people, in utter igno- 
rance of his conduct, perfunctorily recommended him to the Legis- 
lature for re-election, it is contended by him and by many of his par- 
tisans that his conduct has been approved, or at least condoned, and 
that however much his retirement may now be desired, the party is 
powerless to recosider its action. A technicality is invoked to defeat 
the will of the Democracy of Texas, and you, as chairman of the 
Executive Committee, have lent the force of your indorsement to the 
proposition that nothing short of a revocation by the people them- 
selves can undo that which should have no force whatever, because it 
was procured by concealment of facts. 

Under the conditions it seems to me that it would be timely for 
the Executive Committee to discuss the question as to what should be 
the policy of the party. It cannot bind members of the Legislature, 
of course. It cannot revoke the decree of the convention, nor is it 
probable that it could recommend a method of procedure that would 
be adopted in all portions of the State, but it could advise — it could 
recommend some feasible plan for extricating the party from its pres- 
ent dilemma. The State Committee was not created by the State Con- 
vention, as you declare. The committee has existed ever since there 
was a Democratic party in Texas. It is recognized by law, and all 
the State Convention had to do, so far as the State Committee was 
concerned, was to elect a chairman and members. The committee 
should know what party discipline demands, and should not hesitate 
to meet and discuss any situation which is material to the welfare of 
the party. Above all things, it should not lend itself to be used by 
any man who deems himself greater than the party which has hon- 
ored him — it should look to the interest of the Democracy, and not to 
the interests of Senator Bailey. 

C. M. Smithdeal, 
State Committeeman Tenth Senatorial District, 



180 Scmitor J. JV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

WYNNE SAID BAILEY WOULD BOYCOTT STATE INSTITUTIONS. 

During the Travis County campaign, in a joint debate between 
Hon. A. W. Terrell and Col. R. M. Wynne, the latter being a parti- 
san of Mr. Bailey, at Austin, January 3rd, 1907, Mr. Wynne advised 
Travis County voters that their opposition to Bailey would cause the 
Texas Legislature to refuse to appropriate money for the "great State 
institutions" located in said county. 

Col. Wynne said: "My God, fellow citizens, you are revolution- 
ists (whistling). You will go before the next Legislature asking for 
appropriations for the great institutions. Jim Robertson [a Travis 
County Representative] will be asking them to help this city, splen- 
did with its eleemosynary and other institutions. Jim Robertson, 
when you tell them what Austin and Travis County wants, they will 
tell you that Travis County is a bolter." As a matter of fact, the 
Travis County voters did not vote on Mr. Bailey's name in the July 
primaries as the County Chairman had refused to put his name on 
the ticket, because Mr. Bailey, as he claimed, failed to comply with 
the law in that connection and this was the first time that the Travis 
County people had considered Mr. Bailey's candidacy. 

In spite of the above cheap threat and all that Bailey and his co- 
horts could do, Travis County instructed her legislative representa- 
tives to vote against Bailey's return to the Senate — because they had 
then learned of his traitorous connection with "the system." 

On May 2nd, 1908, Travis County gave a majority of over 2,000 
against Bailey as a candidate for Democratic Delegate at large — this 
was an increase of over 1,800 against Bailey as compared to the less 
than 200 majority against him in January, 1907, 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 181 



ANTIDOTES FOR BAILEYISM. 



He that humbleth himself shall be exalted, and he that exalteth 
himself shall be abased. — The Scriptures. 

If thou wouldst be justified, acknowledge thine injustice. He 
that confesses his sin, begins his journey toward salvation. He that 
is sorry for it, mends his pace. He that forsakes it, is at his journey's 
end. — Quarles. 

I feel within me a peace above all earthly dignities, a still and 
quiet conscience. — Shakespeare. 

What other dungeon is so dark as one's own hearti What jailer 
so inexorable as one's self. — Hawthorne. 

Woe unto him in public life who maketh haste to be rich ; or who 
sacrifices his or his country's honor upon the altar of mammon. — 
The Author. 

The voice of conscience is so delicate that it is easy to stifle it; but 
it is also so clear that it is impossible to mistake it. — Mad. de Stael. 

If any speak ill of thee, flee home to thine own conscience, and 
examine thine heart; if thou be guilty, it is a just correction; if not 
guilty, it is a fair instruction. Make use of both — so shalt thou distil 
honey out of gall, and out of an open enemy make a secret friend. — 
Quarles. 

Our conscience is a fire within us, and our sins as the fuel; instead 
of warming, it will scorch us, unless the fuel be removed, or the heat 
of it be allayed by penitential tears. — J. M. Mason. 

A disciplined conscience is a man's best friend. — It may not be 
his most amiable, but it is his most faithful monitor. — A. Phelps. 

This craze for easy and quick made wealth, individual and na- 
tional, is the crime of the age. — The Author. 

The love of money is the root of all evil. — The Scriptures. 

What conscience dictates to be done, or warns me not to do, this 
teach me more than hell to shun, that more than heaven pursue. — 
Pope. 

Labor to keep alive in your heart that little spark of celestial fire 
called conscience. — Washington, 

The men who succeed best in public life are those who take the 
risk of standing by their own convictions. — J. A. Garfield, 



182 Soiator J. Jl'. Bailey of Texas Uninaskcd 

By the sweat of other brows shall we and our children eat bread, 
is the modern doctrine of political and industrial avarice. — The 
Author. 

A man of integrity will never listen to any reason against con- 
science. — Home. 

A clean and sensitive conscience, a steadfast and scrupulous in- 
tegrity in small things as well as great, is the most valuable of all pos- 
sessions, to a nation as to an individual. — H. J. Fan Dyke. 

Be fearful only of thyself, and stand in awe of none more than of 
thine own conscience. There is a Cato in every man — a severe censor 
of his manners. And he that reverences this judge will seldom do 
anything he need repent of. — Burton. 

Never contend with one that is foolish, proud, positive, testy, or 
with a superior, or a clown, in matter of argument. — Fuller. 

Into the vortex of an insatiable appetite for gain, without giving 
value in return, is cast character at any cost. — The Author. 

Where two discourse, if the anger of one rises, he is the wise man 
who lets the contest fall. — Plutarch. 

Across the horizon of every young man's life should be written, 
in letters large and luminous, this salutary motto: "A good name is 
rather to be chosen than great riches, and loving favor rather than 
silver and gold." — The Author. 

Contentment is natural wealth luxury is artificial poverty. — 
Socrates. 

Contentment gives a crown, where fortune hath denied it. — Ford. 

What though we quit all glittering pomp and greatness, we may 
enjoy content; in that alone is greatness, power, wealth, honor, all 
summed up. — Powell. 

If two angels were sent down from heaven, one to conduct an em- 
pire, and the other to sweep a street, they would feel no inclination 
to change employments. — John Newton. 



The Political Life-Story uf a Fallen Idol 183 

CHAPTER XL 

DAVIDSON-BAILEY CORRESPONDENCE OF 1906. 

NOTICE TO PRODUCE. 

The following notice was served on George Clark, as attorney for 
Waters-Pierce Oil Company by Attorney-General Davidson, dated 
Austin, Texas, November 27th, 1906: 

" * * * 12. All letter books and records showing copies of 
all letters from J. D. Johnson to George Clark, of Waco, Tex., and 
all letters from George Clark to J. D. Johnson, of St. Louis, Mo., 
and all letters from J. D. Johnson to all parties in Texas, and all let- 
ters from Mr. J. D. Johnson and Mr. George Clark to J. W. Bailey, 
and all letters from JVIr. J. D. Johnson and Mr. George Clark to par- 
lies in New York relating to the settlement of the cases pending in 
the city of Waco, Tex., against the old Waters-Pierce Oil Company, 
and its officers and agents, all of said letters being written during the 
year 1900. Also all letters and copies of letters written by and to the 
above parties, as set out, relating to the readmission of the Waters- 
Pierce Oil Company into Texas in 1900. * * * " — Galveston 
News, Nov. 28th. 

Mr. Bailey's reply: 

"Washington, Nov. 29. — Senator Bailey made the subjoined 
statement today relative to the allegations which affect him in the suit 
against the Waters-Pierce Oil Company: 'I have believed for more 
than rvvo months that the Attorney-General's office is actively aiding 
the political conspiracy against me in Texas. For some time reports 
have been coming to me of statements made by men connected with 
that office which were absolutely false, and which could have been 
made only for the purpose of creating prejudice in the minds of those 
who do not know the facts; but as those statements were made in pri- 
vate conversations I refrained from taking public notice of them 
until I could be more thoroughly satisfied of the motives of the men 
who made them. The course adopted confirms me absolutely in my 
opinion that he is a part and parcel of a deliberate and sedate con- 
spiracy to defeat a Democratic nominee and defame an honorable 
man. This sensation which they have sought to produce will pass 
precisely as that of the Houston Good Government Club passed, be- 
cause it has no foundation; and it will not take the people of Texas 
long, when they see how utterly groundless it is, to understand the des- 
perate and infamous motives which inspire it. 

" 'Inasmuch as I have publicly and repeatedlv declared that I did 
not act as an attorney for the Waters-Pierce Oil Company in the 
matter of its readmission to the State, it would be important for the 



184 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

people to know whether or not that is true; but its importance would 
be wholly political and has no relation whatever to a legal proceed- 
ing to revoke the permit of that company and to punish it by fines 
and penalties. If the State could prove that the Waters-Pierce Oil 
Company paid me even a fabulous sum for helping it to secure its per- 
mit to transact its business in Texas, it could have no more legal effect 
upon the decision of that case than if the attorneys for the defense 
could prove that the railroads and breweries assisted Attorney-Gen- 
eral Davidson to secure his first nomination as Attorney-General. 
The obvious and only effect of introducing politics into the trial of 
the case is to obscure the real merits of the controversy and to make 
the result a political rather than a judicial one. The State, however, 
cannot possibly prove that I ever accepted employment or compen- 
sation from the Waters-Pierce Oil Company, for the very sufficient 
reason that such is not the truth. If those who represent the State 
have any vouchers or papers purporting to have been signed by me, 
and acknowledging the receipt of money from the Waters-Pierce Oil 
Company, they have been forged, and if they produce any such papers 
in the court I will prove that they are forgeries; or if they attempt to 
prove by secondary evidence that such papers exist in anybody's pos- 
session, I will convict the man ivho so swears of perjury. The state- 
ment that I ever drew a draft or gave an order on the Waters-Pierce 
Oil Company in favor of anybody, for any amount or for any pur- 
pose, is an absolute and unqualified lie.' " [T/ie draft was on Pierce.l 

DAVIDSON TO BAILEY. 

"Austin, Texas, Nov. 30. — Attorney-General Davidson tonight 
gave press copies of a letter addressed to United States Senator Joseph 
W. Bailey, as follows: 

" 'Austin, Texas, Nov. 30. — Hon. J. W. Bailey, Washington. 
Dear Sir: — For more than six years the people of Texas have lived 
under the shadow of the wrong perpetrated against them by the re- 
introduction of the Waters-Pierce Oil Company into Texas under 
your guidance and direction after it had been outlawed by the highest 
courts of die land. During all of this period of time it has plun- 
dered the people without conscience, and the obligation which I, as 
Attorney-General, owed them, prompted me to exhaust every effort 
to purge this State of an institution which should never have been 
permitted to re-enter. In developing testimony necessary to convict 
that corporation of continued violations of our laws, I have proceeded 
with an eye single to that purpose. That our investigations have de- 
veloped the fact that you have not been candid with the people in 
stating your connection with its reintroduction has only filled me with 
shame and sadness. 

" 'Even under the great provocation of having unworthy motives 
ascribed to me, my assistants and associates, I have had no feeling 
other than than that of sorrow, that one to whom has been entrusted 
the high position of United States Senator should resort to abuse and 



The Puliticd Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 185 

villification in an effort to silence tlie righteous indignation of our 
people. 

" 'In my anxiety to escape a controversy that might have injuri- 
ously affected the interests of tlie State in the case against the Waters- 
Pierce Oil Company, I have refrained from denying your misstate- 
ment to the effect that you had tendered your services in that case. If 
the attack made by you on mc through the papers of this date were 
purely personal I might still refrain; but when you charge that the 
officers of the State have entered into a conspiracy to do injury to a 
citizen, I owe it to the people who elected me to an honorable position 
to answer. 

" 'I have filed a petition wherein it is charged that H. C. Pierce, 
acting for the Waters-Pierce Oil Company, before and after its re- 
organization, paid out money in connection with cases pending 
against the old company, thereby assuming obligations of the old cor- 
poration, and that such sums so paid were audited and approved hy 
the auditors of the Standard Oil Company of New Jersey. 

"'The allegations have been sustained by die District Judge as 
proper. They would not have been made if the facts had not been 
regarded as pertinent, nor would they have been made if I had not 
been in position to prove them. 

" 'The circumstance that the evidence established that you re- 
ceived some of the money which tl'.c company charged to expense 
connected with the anti-trust cases, is a fact for which 1 am in no sense 
responsible, and my idea of the discharge of public duty does not 
comport with the suppression of evidence because such evidence 
might injure one in high position. 

" 'That you may have an opportunity of explaining the facts sug- 
gested by the notice filed by us in the discharge of official duty, I 
make the following statements and ask the following questions: 

" 'April 25, 1900, you received from H. C. Pierce $3,300. This 
sum was subsequently returned to H. C. Pierce by the Waters-Pierce 
Oil Company and charged as "account of Texn'^ cases." Was the sum 
given to you as a loan or as a fee? If a loan, iias it ever been paid? 
If a fee, for what service? 

"'On June 15, 1900, a charge was made in the books of the 
Waters-Pierce Oil Company of $1,500 as paid to Henry & Stribling 
"on account of expense of anti-trust civil case." Was not this sum 
paid by a sight draft drawn by you? You have stated that you did not 
draw on the Waters-Pierce Oil Company for such sum. Did you 
draw a draft on H. C. Pierce or J. D. Johnson? You received $200 
on Nov. 23, 1900, which was charged upon the books of the Waters- 
Pierce Oil Company as on "account of Texas cases." 

" 'Did you represent the Waters-Pierce Oil Company or H. C. 
Pierce in Texas in any other case than the anti-trust case? Was the 
sum paid to you by H. C. Pierce or the Waters-Pierce Oil Company? 

" 'On March 28, 1901, or about that time, you wrote a letter to H. 



186 Senator J. JV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

C. Pierce in response to which you received New York exchange for 
$i,7So. 

" 'This sum was charged upon the books of the Waters-Pierce Oil 
Company as on "account of Texas legal expenses." Did you in this 
letter request a loan, or did you demand a fee? If a loan, has it been 
paid? If a fee, for what service? 

" 'On March ist, 1901, you executed your note for $8,000, due in 
four months, to H. C. Pierce. 

" 'You received Pierce's check for the amount. He immediately 
had the amount repaid him by the Waters-Pierce Oil Company. Has 
this note ever been paid? Has payment ever been demanded? Yours 
truly, (Signed) R. V. Davidson, Attorney-General.'" (Galveston 
News, Dec. ist, 1906). 

BAILEY S.AYS HE WILL .ATTEND TO DAVIDSON. 

"St. Louis, Mo., Dec. 2. — Senator Joseph W. Bailey, of Texas, 
left St. Louis at 2 o'clock this afternoon for Austin, Tex., to answer 
the charge made against him by Attorney-General Davidson in an 
open letter to the public. While Senator Bailey uttered no word or 
syllable against Davidson, he said he would attend to that gentleman's 
case in a hurry when he got to Austin. 

" '/ ivill not be in Texas more than two days,' said the Senator at 
the Union Station, as he was about to board his train. 'I can attend 
to Davidson in that time. What I have to say is ready and I will do 
my talking in a mighty few minutes after I get home. Then if there 
is anything sensational about the Texas dispatches it will not reflect 
on Bailey.' 

''''Senator Bailey will return almost immediately to Washington 
to remain for the rest of the session." — Galveston News, December 
3rd, 1906. 

Comment: But he didn't attend to Mr. Davidson "in a hurry," 
nor did he return to Washington for three months, reaching there on 
Sunday, the last day of the session, just in time to entitle him to collect 
his $700 mileage. 

"BAILEY IS WRITING." 

Austin, Texas, Dec. 5.— Mr. Bailey arrived at a late hour, hav- 
ing "missed his train" in St. Louis. Among those who met the Sena- 
tor at the Driskil Hotel, in order to assist him in telling the people 
of Texas about his transactions with the trust masters, were the fol- 
lowing: R. M. Johnson, of the "Houston Bailey Boast;" Clarence 
Owsley, of the "Fort Worth Bailey Record;" T. N. Jones, of Tyler, 
who was afterwards the "Pinkerton" among Mr. Bailey's array of 
legal talent before the Suppression Committee; W. L. Radney, of 
Waco, the same who afterwards testified in behalf of the "exonerated" 
Senator; Judge John Hornsby, he of Warren Moore and John H. 
Kirby bribery fame; Capt. James E. Lucy, who afterwards became 
one of Bailey's campaign managers in the Travis County campaign 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 187 

and paid $ioo to State Senator A. P. Barrett, as the "stamp licker" 
of the Bailey forces, and the same who is the State representative of 
the American Surety Company in which John D. Johnson is said to 
be largely interested and which company afterwards made a $3,500,- 

000 bond, together with Mr. John H. Kirby, for the Waters-Pierce 
Oil Company; Hon. Frank Andrews, of Houston, and Judge M. A. 
Spoonts, of Fort Worth (railroad lawyer), together with Mr. Jot 
Gunter, of San Antonio. — Galveston News, Dec. 6th. 

Isn't it a little strange that all this aggregation had to congregate 
at the State Capitol to assist a brilliant United States Senator in an- 
swering a few simple questions? 

BAILEY TO DAVIDSON. 

Austin, Texas, December 6th, 1906, (Galveston News, Decem- 
ber 7th). — Senator Bailey gave to the press the following open letter 
after extended conferences wdth his friends and after he had de- 
manded of Attorney-General Davidson an opportunity to inspect the 
papers, which demand was refused until Senator Bailey had first an- 
swered his questions, or unless Mr. Bailey would deny that he had 
received money from H. C. Pierce. 

The text of Senator Bailey's letter follows, omitting the heading: 

Austin, Tex., Dec. 6, 1906. — Hon. R. V. Davidson, Austinj 
Texas. Sir: I have read your open letter, dated Nov. 30, and ad- 
dressed to me at Washington, D. C. In the first sentence of it you 
state that the reintroduction of the Waters-Pierce Oil Company into 
Texas was under my "guidance and direction." For many v/ecks 
my enemies have been asserting that on the trial of the case against 
the Waters-Pierce Oil Company the State would prove that I acted 
as counsel in the dissolution of the old company and the reorganiza- 
tion of the new one; and some of them have gone so far as to say that 

1 held and voted the proxies both of H. C. Pierce and the Standard 
Oil Company, thus demonstrating, as they claim, that I must have 
known of the Standard's interest in the Waters-Pierce Oil Company. 
This story was so utterly destitute of truth that I could not believe that 
you, or any one connected with your office, had done anything or said 
anything to warrant its circulation. But your declaration that the 
Waters-Pierce Oil Company re-entered this State under my "guid- 
ance and direction" now satisfies me that the specific falsehood — that 
I acted as an attorney in dissolving the old company and organizing 
the new one — was based upon information emanating from your de- 
partment. Considering your ofiicial position and your relation to this 
case, the people of Texas have a right to suppose that when you de- 
clared that the Waters-Pierce Oil Company re-entered this State 
"under my guidance and direction" you had at least some respectable 
evidence to support such a declaration. 



188 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

BASIS FOR RESIGNATION. 

Can you produce such evidence? If you will, we can close this 
controversy at once and for all time. If you can find even one hon- 
orable man in the United States who will swear that I was ever con- 
sulted about the dissolution of the old company or the organization 
of the new one, or that I ever spoke to any man, or that any man ever 
spoke to me about the issuance of the permit under which the Waters- 
Pierce Oil Company re-entered this State, or that I had any connec- 
tion with that Companv, except such as I have frequently and pub- 
licly stated, and as I will repeat in this letter, I will resign my seat in 
the Senate. 

[Referring to his relations with Pierce, Mr. Bailey said at the 
Waco Convention, August 8, 1900: "He took my advice. * * * 
He went and returned with a new charter, procured at an enormous 
expense — more than $50,000. * * * / happen to know that to- 
day he had issued to every agent in this State a special written in- 
struction to abide the anti-trust laws of Texas. * * * What more 
do you want? * * * i believed I had secured a triumph for the 
State of Texas by helping to bring the greatest trading corporation 
within our borders to the feet of the Attorney-General of the State. 
* * * Don't blame Attorney-General Smith; don't blame Secre- 
tary of State Hardy ; I assume all responsibility for the reintroduction 
of tfie Waters-Pierce Oil Company to Texas."^ 

Believing, as I did at that time, that the Waters-Pierce Oil Com- 
pany was an independent and useful business enterprise, I advised 
the Attorney-General to compromise the judgment which the State 
had obtained against it for having made an illegal contract by re- 
quiring it to pay a fine commensurate with its ofifense against the 
law, and permitting it to continue its business. The Attorney-Gen- 
eral refused to make that compromise, basing his refusal upon the 
ground that if he were willing to compromise, he had no power to do 
so under the judgment of tlie court. At his request I examined that 
judgment and readily concurred in his opinion. 

I then told H. C. Pierce that the Attorney-General was right in 
refusing to compromise the case and that the only lawful course open 
to him was to dissolve his offending corporation, organize a new one, 
come into the State with clean hands, and obey the law. I returned to 
Washington and to my public duties. I did not know when the old 
corporation was dissolved or when the new one was organized, and I 
did not know when the application was made for the permit under 
which it re-entered the State. 

The people of Texas are not required to decide this branch of the 
controversy merely on my statement. So recently as the joint debate 
at Houston between M. M. Crane and myself, the Secretary of State, 
who issued the permit, declared in the most absolute terms, before the 
great audience assembled there, that I had never mentioned to him 
the issuance of the permit under which the Waters-Pierce Oil Com- 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 189 

pany re-entered Texas. The Attorney-General, upon whose legal 
opinion the Secretary of State acted in issuing the permit, publicly 
and repeatedly declared in his lifetime, that from the time of the in- 
terview in which he had refused to make the compromise which I 
had recommended, until after the permit had been issued and had be- 
come the subject of a bitter political controversy, I had never spoken 
a word nor written a line to him with reference to the Waters-Pierce 
Oil Company. 

HAS BEEN CANDID. 

Your next important statement appears differently in different 
newspapers. In several of them you say that your investigations de- 
velop the fact that I have not been candid with the people in stating 
my connection with the reintroduction of the Waters-Pierce Oil 
Company into this State, but your letter, as printed in The Dallas 
News, omits this imputation upon my candor and simply declares 
that your investigation had developed my connection, etc. As the 
statement appears under the first form in four or five different papers, 
and in only one under the last form, I assume that it was written as 
first quoted. So far from having concealed any facts or circum- 
stances of my connection with the reintroduction of the Waters-Pierce 
Oil Company into this State, 1 have even laid bare before the people 
of Texas my private business transactions in the minutest detail in 
order to repell the charges and insinuations which were made against 
me by vicious slanderers. [But he always omitted his "private" 
transactions with Pierce.] I have never done or said anything with 
reference to the Waters-Pierce Oil Company and its affairs that I 
have not already stated publicly and repeatedly to the people of this 
State. 

Your third important statement is made rather as an implication, 
when you describe my statement that I had tendered you my services, 
as "a misstatement." It is not a good practice to repeat conversations 
which occur between men, but a former letter, purporting to have 
been written by you, and at least signed by you, absolves me from the 
obligation which would, under ordinary circumstances, forbid me to 
repeat our conversation, and had any doubt remained in my mind as 
to my right to repeat that conversation in full, your last letter would 
entirely remove it. 

CONVERSATION IN WASHINGTON. 

When you were in Washington during the last session of Con- 
gress the newspapers reported that you were there seeking evidence 
from the Departm.ent of Commerce and Labor to establish the con- 
nection between the Standard Oil Company and the Waters-Pierce 
Oil Companv. I called on you at your hotel and tendered you any 
assistance which I could render in that respect. You thanked me for 
my offer, but told me that the department had very willingly suppliec' 
you with all the information in its possession. 



190 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

We then took up the question of the Waters-Pierce Oil Company, 
and you told me about having sent a reputable lawyer of this State, 
not connected with the Attorney-General's department, as your 
special representative, to Missouri to inquire fully into all the facts. 
After some discussion of the case in a general way, 1 told you that if 
the Missouri proceedings developed a state of facts, or if your in- 
quiry, independent of the Missouri proceedings, elicited information 
which rendered it reasonably certain that you could conduct your case 
against the Waters-Pierce Oil Company to a successful conclusion, 
I desired to assist you in it. I told you, however, that if there was 
any doubt about your succeeding with the case, I did not want to have 
anything to do with it, because I knew perfectly well that if I should 
take part in the prosecution, and the State lost the case, my enemies 
would swear that I had injected myself into it for the purpose of 
helping the defendant. You agreed with me that such was true, or at 
least you expressed no dissent from what I had said. 

You claim that what you have done, and all that you have done, 
was prompted by your sense of duty to the State. If anything were 
needed to convince all thinking men that your purpose in demanding 
the production of these papers was political rather than judicial, it 
could be found in the fact that you did not file that notice until after 
you had insured the postponement of the trial by filing an amended 
petition containing new matter, and after the defendant's attorneys 
had announced in open court that they would move for a continuance. 

DONE FOR POLITICAL EFFECT. 

Knowing that on account of the new matter contained in your 
amended petition the court would be compelled to grant the motion 
for continuance, you hastily filed the demand for these papers, al- 
though they could not be used in the case itself until next March, 
and the only way they could be used before that time was for their 
political effect. Besides this, if you have in your possession, as has 
been claimed by some of those connected with your department, these 
original papers, your demand upon the attorneys for the defendant to 
produce them was a mere stage play, and you could have offered them 
in evidence upon the trial without any previous demand upon the de- 
fense for their production. I am willing for the lawyers of this State 
to say what was the puipose of that proceeding. [Bailey has fre- 
quently admitted and complained since that the lawyers of Texas 
were against him. They are the best judges.] 

If you must prove that the new Waters-Pierce Oil Company had 
assumed the obligations of the old one, you could have done that with- 
out injecting politics into the trial of your case. If you needed to 
prove that those who had been the attorneys of the old Waters-Pierce 
Oil Company had continued as the attorneys of the new one, you 
could have proven that fact by simply asking that question of the very 
lawyers who sat in the court room with you as the attorneys of the 
defendant. The court records of Travis County show that at least 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 191 

two of the lawyers who are now engaged in defending the Waters- 
Pierce Oil Company were its attorneys in the old case, and you could 
have proved by the Secretary of State, who issued the permit, that 
John D. Johnson, who was the attorney of the old Waters-Pierce Oil 
Company, and is the attorney of the present Waters- Pierce Oil Com- 
pany, was the very man who brought to his office the application for 
the permit under which that company is now transacting business in 
this State. 

RIGHT TO HAVE AN ATTORNEY. 

It is, however, a gross absurdity to pretend that you can strengthen 
your case against the Waters-Pierce Oil Company by proving that it 
had attorneys either before or after its dissolution and reorganization. 
Even a corporation has a right to the services of a lawyer in this couii- 
try, and it is no evidence against its lawful character to prove that it 
had an attorney and paid him for his services. If, however, it is es- 
sential to your case against the Waters-Pierce Oil Company to prove 
that I have ever been its attorney for a day or in any single transac- 
tion, or that I ever charged or received one dollar from it for any 
service, your case must fail. 

If it were pertinent and important for you to prove that the audit- 
ors of the Standard Oil Company audited the accounts of the Waters- 
Pierce Oil Company, the fact could have been established by any wit- 
ness having knowledge of it. And if it be true that the Standard Oil 
Company does audit the accounts of the Waters-Pierce Oil Company, 
then there must be thousands of items which have been so audited and 
about which there can be no dispute. Yet in presenting, or in pre- 
tending to present in this instance, the evidence of this relation be- 
tween two companies, you have chosen to rely, so far as your case has 
now been developed, upon items purporting to affect me alone, al- 
though it is obvious to every thinking man that those who furnished 
you this so-called evidence of accounts appearing in my name on the 
books of the Waters-Pierce Oil Company, and audited by the agents 
of the Standard Oil Company could have supplied you with evidence 
which could not have been successfully controverted, and which 
would have given no political complexion to the case. 

THE VOUCHERS AND DRAFTS. 

I come now to your questions about the vouchers and drafts and I 
shall answer each separately, and according to the order in which you 
have asked them. But before doing that, it will perhaps help to 
clarify the question in the public mind to restate exactly what issue 
is between me and my enemies. Six years ago I stated under oath to 
the Legislative committee that I had not acted as an attorney for the 
Waters-Pierce Oil Company in the matter of its complications with 
the State, and T further stated that I had not accepted any compensa- 
tion for the recommendation of the compromise which I made to the 
Attorney-General. For the six weeks immediately preceding the last 



192 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

election, I delivered a series of speeches in this State, in almost every 
one of which I repeated what I had said six years ago, and I further 
declared that 1 had never acted as an attorney for the Waters-Pierce 
Oil Company in any matter, nor accepted any compensation from it. 
In these speeches, and at the same time, I declared that I had 
represented H. C. Pierce in many matters, and that I had engaged 
in various business transactions with him and for him, none of which 
related in any manner to the business or afTairs of either the Waters- 
Pierce Oil Company or Standard Oil Company. No intelligent man 
in this State has forgotten that the very gravity of the charge which I 
was answering from the stump during the six weeks immediately 
preceding the election was a transaction involving a large sum in 
which H. C. Pierce was interested, and I said to the people that I not 
only acted as attorney in the matter of those Tennessee properties for 
H. C. Pierce and others, but that I had also acted as an attorney for 
H. C. Pierce in many other matters. 

RELATIONS WITH PIERCE. 

You cannot, therefore, contradict anything I have ever said by 
showing any business relations between H. C. Pierce and me. Be- 
fore dismissing this phase of the question, it may be well for me to 
remind the people of this State that when I stated six years ago that 
I had refused to accept a fee for what I said to the Attorney-General 
about the compromise which the Waters-Pierce Oil Company then 
sought to make with the State, I did so not because I thought it was 
wrong for me, or any other reputable lawyer, to represent the Waters- 
Pierce Oil Company and accept a fee from it, because I then believed 
it to be an independent business, free from the ownership and control 
of a trust; but I placed my refusal to take the fee wholly and distinctly 
upon the ground that the service which 1 tried to render it was a 
friendly one and not a legal one. Nothing could have induced me to 
take a fee for recommending that a friend of mine should exercise 
his discretion in the way in w^hich I advise. I was willing to state to 
a committee of the Legislature, as I did, that, my time permitting, I 
would have accepted legal employment from the Waters-Pierce Oil 
Company. How can any sensible man suppose for a moment what I 
had done, and at the time publicly and solemnly declare that I would 
do that very thing without the slightest hesitation? 

I will also remind you and the public that this controversy had 
its origin in the representation -of the Waters-Pierce Oil Company 
that it was an independent enterprise; that I relied upon that repre- 
sentation, and nothing was known about the Standard Oil Company's 
ownership of stock of the Waters-Pierce Oil Company until the fact 
was developed in the Missouri prosecution. If that representation 
had been true, as I believed it to be, no man would be so narrow- 
minded as to call in question any business relation between H. C. 
Pierce and me. Certainly I cannot be held responsible for facts or 
conditions of which I had no knowledge 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 193 

BORROWED MONEY OF PIERCE. 

I will now answer your questions. Your first question is: 

"April 25, 1900, you received from H. C. Pierce $3,300. This 
sum was subsequently returned to H. C. Pierce by the Waters-Pierce 
Oil Company and charged as 'account of Texas cases.' 

"Was the sum given to you as a loan or as a fee? If a loan, has it 
ever been paid? If a fee, for what service?" 

When H. C. Pierce asked me to intercede with the Attorney- 
General in behalf of his company, and I agreed to do so, he offered 
to pay me for the service, and I declined to receive any pay upon the 
ground, as I have stated above, that the only service which I intended 
to render was a friendly and not a legal one, and was not, therefore, 
such a service as a lawyer, with my view of his profession, would ac- 
cept compensation for performing. He asked if I were not a lawyer, 
and I told him that I was, but I was one of the kind who practiced 
law, and not influence. I told him, however, that I was then on my 
way to Kentucky for the purpose of selling some horses to raise a sum 
of money that I needed, but that, in view of a political situation which 
would bring me back to Texas and which I had already explained to 
him when I told him that I would speak to the Attorney General 
while here, I might not have time to dispose of the horses while in 
Kentucky, and that if he would be willing to take my obligation and 
allow me to pay it unth interest, I would consider the loan of $3,300 
a favor. [The principle was never re-paid, according to the books 
of the Waters-Pierce Oil Company, much less the interest.] 

He loaned me the money, and I repaid every dollar of it to him 
as soon as I sold the horses, which I did soon after Congress ad- 
journed that summer. I borrowed that money purely as a personal 
transaction between Pierce and me, as the voucher, which I under- 
stand, was stolen from his papers and is come in your possession, will 
show. That voucher not only shows that the transaction was be- 
tween Pierce and me, but it expresses in the face of it that the money 
was received by me as a "demand loan." You are presuming very 
far upon the intelligence of Texas Democrats when you ask them to 
suspect that a lawyer would give a demand obligation for money if 
he were collecting it as a fee. An idiot knows better than to believe 
that a man gives an evidence of indebtedness when he is collecting 
a debt. 

DECLARES IT A FORGERY. 

Your second question is: 

"On June 15, 1900, a charge was made in the books of the Waters- 
Pierce Oil Company of $1,500 as paid to Henry & Stribling on ac- 
count of expenses of anti-trust civil cases. Was not this sum paid by 
sight draft by you? You have stated that you did not draw on the 
Waters-Pierce Oil Company for such sum. Did you draw such a 
draft on H. C. Pierce or J. D. Johnson?" 



194 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

I have never given a draft to Henry & Stribling for any amount 
on the Waters-Pierce Oil Company or on H. C. Pierce or on J. D. 
Johnson; nor have 1 ever given a draft to Henry & Stribling, or to 
either of them on anybody or for any amount. If you have in your 
possession such draft, or if there be any such paper in existence it is 
a downright and flagrant forgery. [The draft was drawn on H. C. 
Pierce, June 13, 1900, through a Gainesville Bank.] 

Your third question is: 

"You received $200 on Nov. 23, 1900, which was charged upon 
the books of the Waters-Pierce Oil Company as on 'account of Texas 
cases.' Did you represent the Waters-Pierce Oil Company or H. C. 
Pierce in Texas in any cases except the anti-trust case? Was the sum 
paid to you by H. C. Pierce or the Waters-Pierce Oil Company?" 

I do not recall this transaction, but I know that I did not receive 
this money from the Waters-Pierce Oil Company, because I never 
received any money from it. I assume that it was to cover my ex- 
penses in connection with some personal business of H. C. Pierce, 
which I attended. It did not relate to any business of H. C. Pierce 
in Texas, because, so far as I know, he has never had any personal 
business in this State. The amount involved and the date given must 
satisfy all reasonable men that it did not relate to the reintroduction 
of the Waters-Pierce Oil Company into the State, which occurred 
several months before the time you specify. 

NEEDED $1,750 AND GOT IT. 

"On March 28, 1901, or about that time, you wrote a letter to 
H. C. Pierce, in response to which you received New York exchange 
for $1,750. This sum was charged up on the books of the Waters- 
Pierce Oil Company as on 'account of Texas legal expenses.' Did 
you in this letter request a loan, or did you demand a fee? If a loan, 
has it been paid? If a fee, for what purpose?" 

I do not remember, of course, the date of the letter which you ask 
if I wrote, but I do know that I wrote H. C. Pierce a letter request- 
ing him to send me $1,750, and I also remember that I needed the 
money at once and in order to save delay that might arise from his 
neglecting to send me his own check or overlooking the indorsement 
of exchange I told him to send me New York exchange at once and 
to make it payable to my order, so as to save the necessity of his in- 
dorsing it. I also know, however, that there is not a syllable in that 
letter which indicates in the remotest degree that the $1,750 had any 
relation to the Waters-Pierce Oil Company or its business. I know, 
further, that the $1,750 which I requested then, was a part of a loan 
which I had obtained from H. C. Pierce something like three weeks 
before that and the amount of which I did not draw from him in 
full at that time. The letter requesting the $1,750 is not the only let- 
ter that I wrote Mr. Pierce, touching the disposition of that loan. 
And if you will compare the dates of the letter and the note, both of 
which I understand were stolen from the files of his papers and are 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 195 

now in your possession, you will find that the loan as stated above 
was made something like three weeks before the letter was written re- 
questing the $1,750, which was a part of the loan. 

NEGOTIATED $8,000 LOAN. 

"On March ist, 1901, you executed your note for $8,000 due in 
four months to H. C. Pierce. You received Pierce's check for the 
amount. He immediately had the amount repaid by the Waters- 
Pierce Oil Company. Has this note ever been paid? Has pay- 
ment ever been demanded?" 

My reply to that question is, that just before adjournment of Con- 
gress, in the spring of 1901, I arranged with H. C. Pierce to borrow 
$8,000, which I expected to need for several different and small 
transactions during that summer. I executed my note to him for the 
full amount, which 1 obtained as I needed it from time to time, as I 
obtained the $1,750 which I have explained in answer to your third 
question. Afterward and before that transaction which required an 
additional sum of money and which I arranged to borrow from a St. 
Louis bank with the indorsement of H. C. Pierce. That larger note 
was executed to H. C. Pierce, indorsed by him and negotiated to the 
bank, to which 1 paid it in full. [He was forced to admit on the 
stand that he did not know how this larger note of $24,000 or $25,000 
was paid; admitting that at least a part of it might have been paid in 
"services" — influence.] 

The $8,000 note about which you inquire, was included in this 
larger note, and was paid as follows: The larger note, when nego- 
tiated to the bank, was passed by the bank to the credit of H. C. 
Pierce, and Mr. Pierce gave me his check for the difference between 
the $8,000 note and the new loan, and thus to an absolute certainty 
if that $8,000 note appears to have been paid by the Waters-Pierce 
Oil Company, the proceeds of it were stolen by some man connected 
with that company. 

THE $8,000 NOTE DISAPPEARED. 

This seems to be very probably what happened, because when the 
$8,000 note was paid by its inclusion in the new loan Mr. Pierce was 
not able to find and deliver it to me, but said he would find it and send 
it to me. After waiting thirty, or perhaps sixty days, without receiv- 
ing that paid note, I wrote Mr. Pierce, reminding him that he had 
neglected to send it, and he replied, saying that he had not been able 
to find it, but he knew it was among his papers and as soon as he had 
time to look through his papers he would get it and send it to me, 
and he stated that I could hold his letter as his receipt that the note 
had been duly paid. I have that letter among my papers, and it is 
reasonably certain that a copy of it is in the copy book or files of 
letters kept by H. C. Pierce. 

In replying to your questions, seriatim, I have purposely omitted 
any comment on your statement as to what appears in the books of 



196 Senator J. W. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

the Waters-Pierce Oil Company, because what I will say about each 
applies with equal force to all of them, and therefore I have pre- 
ferred to answer that suggestion in a separate paragraph. 

I have never had access to the books of the Waters-Pierce Oil 
Company, and therefore do not know what they contain; but I do 
know that if they import that the Waters-Pierce Oil Company had 
paid any money to me, directly or indirectly, every such entry is 
utterly and wholly false; and my opinion is that if such entries ap- 
pear in those books the man who made them or who had them made 
simply robbed the Waters-Pierce Oil Company. Such a proceed- 
ing on the part of those in charge of books and papers of that com- 
pany and H. C. Pierce would have been an easy one. 

SUSPECTS ROBBERY. 

For instance, the $8,000 note which I gave to H. C. Pierce, and 
every dollar of which I paid, as recited above, could have been taken 
by an employe of that company and passed into its accounts as an ex- 
penditure of $8,000, and that employe could have put that sum of 
money in his pocket, thus robbing his employer by a false entry to 
that extent. My opinion is that this precise thing was done, if such 
an entry appears in those books, and I believe that the reason H. C. 
Pierce was never able to find that $8,000 note among his private 
papers after I had paid it was because it was passed to the Waters- 
Pierce Oil Company, and the money stolen by the man who ordered 
the entry made. But whether that entry appears on the books of the 
Waters-Pierce Oil Company, if it does so appear, whether the pro- 
ceeds of the note were stolen, is a matter that does not touch me. 
Certainly the most stupid man must know that if I had felt even a 
sense of impropriety in my dealings with H. C. Pierce and I had 
been willing to violate the proprieties of public of professional life, 
I would and could have conducted transactions without reducing 
them to writing, or putting into the records of any corporation evi- 
dence of what I desired to deny or conceal. [He did not suppose 
his transactions were going into the records of the Waters-Pierce Oil 
Co., because he made them appear as personal transactions between 
liimself and Pierce.] 

ASKED TO SEE THE DOCUMENTS. 

This brings me to the consideration of another matter. This 
morning I requested, in writing, permission to examine and to have 
copies of such purported vouchers, notes, checks, drafts or papers 
in your possession as pretend to reflect any transaction between the 
Waters-Pierce Oil Company and myself. I knew and stated that no 
genuine paper existed showing that I had received any money from 
that company on any account. The letter which I addressed to you 
is as follows : 

"Austin, Tex., Dec. 6. Hon. R. V. Davidson, Attorney General, 
Austin, Tex. Sir: I am advised by the public prints and otherwise 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 197 

that you have in your possession certain vouchers and papers, or 
copies thereof, purporting in some way to connect me with the Wa- 
ters-Pierce Oil Company in regard to certain business transactions. 
I never had any business transactions of any kind with the Waters- 
Pierce Oil Company, and I never received one dollar from it on any 
account, and if any such vouchers, notes, checks or drafts exist, they 
are deliberate and criminal forgeries. I am today preparing an 
answer to the questions propounded in your open letter to me, and in 
order that I may answer once and for all the slanders and forgeries 
affecting my character on this subject, 1 request that I be allowed to 
examine such papers as you have in relation to these matters, and to 
have exact copies thereof, with all indorsements thereon. I know that 
no genuine paper thus affecting me is in existence, but I do not know 
what forgeries there may be, though I assume from your letter and 
purported statements from your department that some such forgeries 
do exist. If your purpose is to let the people of Texas know the truth, 
and you will give me access to such papers as you have, I will see that 
the people know the whole truth, and that you are definitely and pos- 
itively advised of the character of the forgeries upon which all such 
slanders against me are predicated. 

"So far as such papers purport to reflect any transaction between 
me and the Waters-Pierce Oil Company, or to show that I received 
any money from said company, they are each and all absolutely and 
wholly false, and forged for the purpose of injuring me. 

"An immediate reply is respectfully requested. 
"Very respectfully, 

' "J. W. Bailey." 

MAY LOOK AT THE PAPERS. 

Your reply was as follows : 

"Austin, Tex., Dec. 6, 1906. Hon. J. W. Bailey, Austin, Tex. 
Dear Sir: I am in receipt of your letter of this date delivered to me 
by Messrs. T. N. Jones and Jot Gunter, in which you express a de- 
sire to be placed in possession of evidence which is at my command 
before replying to the questions I have propounded to you in my 
communication of Nov. 30: 

"You say: 'I never had any business transactions of any kind 
with the Waters-Pierce Oil Company, and I have never received one 
dollar from it on any account, and if any such vouchers, notes, 
checks or drafts exist, they are deliberate and criminal forgeries.' 

"I have stated that you received several sums of money from H. 
Clay Pierce, formerly president of the Waters-Pierce Oil Com- 
pany, which amounts were charged on the books of the Waters- 
Pierce Oil Company as expenses incurred with reference to the 
Texas anti-trust cases. You know whether or not you received 
money from Mr. Pierce, and I assume you have had opportunity to 
ascertain if the sums are charged as indicated, and that you are now 



198 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

in a position to give the people of Texas the whole truth without the 
conditions named in your letter. 

"If, in a written communication to me, you say you did not re- 
ceive any of said sums of money from H. C. Pierce, 1 will, under 
proper conditions, to be prescribed by me, afford reasonable oppor- 
tunity for the inspection of the papers in my possession. 

"Yours very truly, 

"R. V. Davidson, 
Attorney-General." 

CONVINCED OF FORGERIES. 

You will observe that the request made of you was much broader 
than the questions which you had propounded and the papers in re- 
lation to those questions. Having become convinced that you had in 
your possession papers which were forgeries, and assuming for the 
purpose of the questions propounded that you desired to deal fairly 
with me and fairly with the public, it was my desire to specifically 
answer every one in your possession at this time, so that the public 
could judge of the completeness of my vindication, and have the 
question forever settled. 

Your declination is placed upon what you must have known, if 
you are familiar with the public prints, was an impossible condition. 
You must have known when that letter was written that I had stated 
in public speeches repeatedly that I had been employed by H. C. 
Pierce in many transactions as his attorney, for which service he paid 
me, and you therefore imposed a condition which you knew was im- 
possible of performance. 

I had hoped that you did not wish to descend from the exalted 
position which you hold to engage in a political warfare against me, 
and believed that you would not refuse to afford me an opportunity 
to examine papers supposed to be in your possession which I had de- 
nounced as forgeries, at a time when every effort of unscrupulous 
and designing enemies is being concentrated to blacken my character 
and reputation. If it be your purpose to use the power of your offi- 
cial position in an effort to destroy me by the use of papers which I 
know to be forgeries, if they reflect what I am informed through 
your questions, the public prints and otherwise, they purport to re- 
flect, then as a manly man you should meet the issue squarely, and no 
longer prate about being filled with shame and sorrow concerning 
the existence of papers which I denounce to be spurious and which 
you refuse to let me see. 

NEVER WATERS-PIERCE ATTORNEY. 

Before concluding the reference to your letter, I want to state to 
you and to the public that your assumption that I have had an oppor- 
tunity to ascertain if any sums of money are charged on the books of 
the Waters-Pierce Oil Company as expenses incurred with refer- 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 199 

ence to the Texas anti-trust cases, or otherwise, is wholly gratuitous. 
1 have never examined, or asked to have examined, any books, vouch- 
ers or papers of any character with reference to the business of the 
Waters-Pierce Oil Company, save and except the request made of 
you. I have never been its attorney; I have had no occasion to ex- 
amine its books, and I have no information at all about what its 
books disclose. No discharged, discredited servant of the Waters- 
Pierce Oil Company has come to me with papers purporting to re- 
flect the records of that Company; I have had no access to such 
papers, and you are the only person of whom I have ever made any 
request in relation to them. 

Before concluding this open and public letter, I want to say to the 
people of Texas concerning my traducers, their motives and meth- 
ods, that for the first time in the history of Texas politics the Demo- 
crats of this State have been called to witness an effort, not to defeat 
a candidate before a Democratic convention or Democratic prima- 
ries for a nomination, but a vicious, desperate and concerted effort 
to absolutely destroy a man who has served this State in Congress 
faithfully and well for fifteen long years, and whose service the true 
and loyal Democrats of Texas have rewarded with a practically 
unanimous renomination. If it could with any show of truth be 
asserted that I had ever sacrificed the honor or neglected the inter- 
est of my constituents, or that I had ever been recreant to the great 
principles of the Democratic party, I could then understand how 
Democrats would feel impelled by a sense of duty to our State and 
party to contest with all their power and resources my candidacy for 
another nomination. 

WAR OF PERSONAL HATRED. 

Unable to cite a single instance where I have failed in the dis- 
charge of my duties to our people or to our party, and while con- 
fessing that my services have not only been approved by the people 
who elected me, but have commanded the cordial respect of my 
party associates in Congress, my traducers can not convince the Dem- 
ocrats of Texas that this war on me is inspired by other than per- 
sonal hatred or disappointed ambition. 

While pretending to believe that I have been subjected to cor- 
porate influences, the most reckless of my accusers has not dared to 
specify a single vote which I have ever cast, or a single speech which 
I have ever made, to justify such a criticism. I know, besides, that 
the assaults upon my character and integrity have the cordial sym- 
pathy, if not the active assistance, of powerful interests whose special 
privileges I have resolutely opposed both as a member of the House 
of Representatives and as a Senator from this State. With an abid- 
ing faith, I appeal from the gross and bitter calumnies with which 
I have been assailed to the intelligence and patriotism of Texas 
Democrats. J. W. BAILEY. 



200 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

BAILEY TO DAVIDSON. 
HENRY & STRIBLING DRAFT. 

Dallas, Texas, December 8, (Galveston News, December 9th), 
1906. — 

Hon. R. V. Davidson, Austin, Tex. — Sir: I have read your let- 
ter which appeared in the newspapers this morning. It eliminates 
very much from the discussion by confirming what 1 said in my open 
letter to you. Indeed, the documents you print, so far from support- 
ing the inferences which your questions were calculated to raise in 
the public mind, directly contradict them. You sought to make it 
appear that the $3,300 mentioned in your first question was a fee paid 
to me by the Waters-Pierce Oil Company, but the memorandum 
you print establishes beyond the shadow of a doubt that it was, as I 
declared it to be, a demand loan made personally by H. C. Pierce to 
me. 

Your question was also calculated to make it appear that even if 
Pierce made the loan to me, the Waters-Pierce Oil Company repaid 
the sum to him and passed it to its account as an expense; but one of 
the indorsements which, according to your memorandum, appear on 
the back of the voucher, which you claim that Pierce gave the Wa- 
ters-Pierce Oil Company, shows that voucher to have been "charged 
to bills receivable." Every intelligent business man, of course, will 
know that when an item is charged to bills receivable it is held and 
treated as an item that must be paid. If this $3,300 had been con- 
sidered an expenditure by the Waters-Pierce Oil Company, it would 
have been charged either to the expense account or to the profit and 
loss account. [But the proof afterwards showed that the $3,300 was 
charged from Bills Receivable to profit and loss.] The statement 
appearing in your own memorandum demonstrates that Pierce used 
his voucher as a bill receivable, to be paid by him in the due course of 
business. 

I could point out other particulars in which the memoranda you 
publish negatives, like this, the presumptions which you sought to 
raise. 

REFER TO bank's STAMPS. 

But it is unnecessary to pursue this particular branch of the sub- 
ject further, because there is one item in this controversy which ought 
to be accepted as decisive, and that item is the Henry & Stribling 
draft. This is the one point which you assert, and which I deny, that 
is susceptible of absolute and positive proof if the facts exist, as you 
have alleged them. If I ever drew a draft in favor of Henry & 
Stribling, or either of them, that draft will show on the back of it the 
indorsement of every bank through which it passed in the course of 
collection, and every bank through which it passed made an entry of 
it on its books. It must have passed through at least two banks— the 
one which forwarded it and the one which collected it. 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 201 

Thus it is certain that if you have any draft in your possession you 
can tell from the indorsements on the back of it the banks through 
which it passed, and by a simple application to those banks you can 
find the transaction entered on their books. You can therefore estab- 
lish by competent, disinterested and reputable witnesses that I gave 
this draft, if, in fact, I did give it. 

WILL RESIGN IF CHARGE IS PROVEN. 

Now, sir, if you can prove by any single bank that I ever drew a 
draft in favor of Henry & Stribling, or either of them, on the Wa- 
ters-Pierce Company, or H. C. Pierce, or J. D. Johnson, or any other 
individual, firm or corporation for $1,500, or for any other sum, I 
will resign my seat in the Senate and I will retire forever from public 
life. I will go further than this: If you can produce any order, re- 
ceipt or memorandum in favor of Henry & Stribling, or either of 
them, bearing my signature, indorsement or approval, I will resign 
my seat in the Senate and retire forever from public life. 

I never heard of a loan to Stribling by the Waters-Pierce Oil 
Company, or H. C. Pierce, or J. D. Johnson, and the purported tel- 
egram which you print about it was never mentioned to me directly or 
remotely by any man or at any time. I never mentioned to Mr. 
Stribling, nor did he ever mention to me, any loan or note or draft 
with the Waters-Pierce Oil Company, or H. C. Pierce, or J. D. 
Johnson, or any other person, firms or corporation. 

[The reason why Mr. Bailey laid such stress on this $1,500 draft 
was the fact that he, himself, had probably destroyed it in November, 
1900, when Francis sent it to him together with the $3,300 receipt 
that he had signed, thus enabling Bailey to destroy the only signatures 
that he had perhaps given Pierce up to that time.] 

DOUBLE PAYMENT INDICATED. 

There is one curious feature about the memorandum you print in 
reference to the $1,750 item. It reads as follows: 

"Waters-Pierce Oil Company, Henry Clay Pierce, St. Louis, 
Mo., June 10, 1901. Mr. J. P. Gruet, Secretary, Building: Dear 
Sir: Please send New York Exchange for $1,750 to Joseph W. 
Bailey, Gainesville, Tex., and charge against legal expense account 
of Texas legislation. 

"I sent this amount personally to Mr. Bailey in response to his 
enclosed letter of March 28. Since then Mr. Bailey has returned the 
amount to me and it is now proper for the company to make this pay- 
ment. Attach Mr. Bailey's letter to your voucher and merely en- 
close the draft to him without voucher. His enclosed letter will be 
your voucher. Yours truly, H. C. Pierce, President." 

Any casual reader must observe the inconsistency of this statement 
with your former question and with the undisputed fact. It repre- 
sents Mr. Pierce as saying that he had sent this $1,750 to me in re- 
sponse to my letter of March 28, and that I had afterwards returned 



202 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

it to him, and tlien adds tiiat it was proper at that time for the com- 
pany to make the payment. It would be difficult to make a sensi- 
ble man believe that I would call on Pierce for a fee of $1,750 in 
March, then return it to him, and again collect it from his company. 
It is absolutely certain that I received $1,750 only once and yet the 
above memorandum, if true, shows that I received it twice. 

HAD DEALINGS ONLY WITH PIERCE. 

In the beginning you charge that the Waters-Pierce Oil Com- 
pany re-entered the State under my "guidance and direction." For 
six years my enemies have been pursuing me with this same allega- 
tion and all of them have failed, as you have failed, to produce a 
shred of evidence to sustain it. In fact you have practically 
abandoned it for the presentation of trivial and technical matters. 
Again, your original allegations implied, if they did not directly 
charge, that I had acted as an attorney for the Waters-Pierce Oil 
Company in the matter of its readmission and had received compen- 
sation for that service. There is not, and there never was a syllable 
of truth in that accusation; and for six years I have challenged my 
most inveterate and unreasonable enemies to ofTer evidence which 
even tended to establish it. I have said publicly and repeatedly that 
I have represented H. C. Pierce personally in many matters. All 
who heard my speeches preceding the election will remember that 
in discussing the Tennessee properties I declared that I not only acted 
as an attorney in that matter, but that I conducted many other trans- 
actions with and for H. C. Pierce. Nothing in your much heralded 
documents, some of them stolen, some of them forged, and still other 
irrelevant, confused and confusing disprove anything I have said. 
They not only tend to show that I have had business relations with 
H. C. Pierce, a fact that I had frequently myself asserted, and that 1 
had borrowed money from him, which money I repaid to the last dol- 
lar. 

CERTAIN SOME ARE FORGERIES. 

You have talked much about your sense of duty to the State, but 
you do not seem to appreciate the duty which in common fairness 
you owe to every citizen of the State. The meanest convict, when 
arraigned before our courts upon any charge, is entitled as a matter 
of legal right to inspect any paper which the State attempts to offer 
in evidence against him. He is entitled to examine it for erasures 
and interlineations and to challenge its genuineness. You seem to 
think, however, that you can probably arraign me before the world 
and call on me as you did in your first open Ictteer to answer ques- 
tions with respect to papers which you denied me the right to see be- 
fore I answered. I believed when I asked you for permission to ex- 
amine those papers that they had been forged in whole or in part for 
the purpose of connecting me with a transaction of which I had no 
knowledge; and since reading the documents in print, I am certain 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 203 

that some of them are forgeries. Even if in the beginning you be- 
lieved those papers truthfully reflected a business transaction between 
me and the Waters-Pierce Company, you knew that you had received 
them from a man who had stolen them from the files of his employer 
and out of an abundant caution against doing me an injustice, you 
ought to have submitted them to my examination. 

HE WHO FURNISHED THE DOCUMENTS. 

Surely your experience as a lawyer and as a man must make you 
know that any man who will steal a paper would alter it or forge a 
new one if the one he had stolen did not suit his purpose. If you 
had no suspicion that you had been imposed upon by forgeries, you 
still had knowledge that you were dealing with a thief, and that the 
information furnished by such a man is seldom used by men in your 
position and should never be used without giving to those affected ac- 
cess to it. 

Not only must you have known that the man from whom you ob- 
tained those papers had stolen them, but you must have also be- 
lieved that same man to be a perjurer. I understand that you have 
instigated, or at least approved, an indictment against one officer 
[Pierce] of the Waters-Pierce Oil Company for having made an 
affidavit which is precisely the same as the one made afterward by 
the man who supplied you with this document. 

I willingly leave for the decent and fair-minded men of Texas 
to say how much weight they will attach to documents furnished by 
a man who either robbed the files of his employer's office or forged 
the papers which you are using and the evidence of whose talse 
swearing in order to deceive the officers of the State, is a part of the 
case which you have in charge. J. W. Bailey. 

WRITING THROUGH THE NEWSPAPERS. 

Senator Bailey arrived from Austin this morning and went to the 
Oriental Hotel, where he began the preparation of his foregoing re- 
ply to the Attorney General. 

Among those who called on him were Hon. Samuel B. Cooper of 
Beaumont, Congressman-elect; Hon. George A. Garden, State Dem- 
ocratic chairman; Hon. J. C. McNealus, secretary of the State Dem- 
ocratic Executive Committee; S. B. Burnett of Forth Worth, State 
Senator Looney of Greenville, State Senator Barrett of Bonham, 
State Senator Alexander of Weatherford, Hon. James S. Dudley of 
Paris, former chairman of the State Democratic Executive Commit- 
tee; Rev. George W. Owens, Rev. George C. Rankin, Hon. Nelson 
Philips, City Attorney J- T- Collins, W. F. Moroney, Capt. John 
Field and Col. John Waddy Tate, all of Dallas; Hon. W. E. Spell 
and John Stephens of Hillsboro and William Bacon of Greenville. _ 

[With an occasional exception, just the same old crowd of polit- 
ical theologians and theological politicians.] 



204 Senator J. W. Bailey uf Texas Unmasked 

DAVIDSON REPLIES TO BAILEV'S ALLEGATION OF FORGERY. 

Austin, Texas, Jan. 5, (Dallas News, Jan. 6), 1907. Attorney 
General Davidson gave out the following today: 
It has been charged: 

1. That I have in my possession, to be used in the trial of the 
Waters-Pierce Oil case, forged documents. 

2. That I have had these documents many months, and that I 
have suppressed them for improper purposes. 

3. That in the prosecution of the Waters-Pierce Oil Company 
I have affiliated with persons connected with the Standard Oil inter- 
ests. 

4. That I secured the postponement of the Waters-Pierce Oil 
case to prevent the development of the facts in that case at this time. 

5. That I have agreed to settlements of certain anti-trust suits 
wherein the State was deprived of money to which it was entitled. 

To these charges I answer: 

1. The documents, vouchers and letters in my possession are or- 
iginals and not copies. They are genuine. 

2. I learned of the existence of these documents about Aug. 25, 
1906, and I came into possession of them on Nov. 17, 1906. I never 
called on defendant to produce a single document which I had in my 
possession. 

3. I have never at any time had any character of association or 
affiliation with any person connected with the Standard Oil interests. 

4. The Waters-Pierce Oil case was continued upon the motion 
of that company over the earnest and vigorous protests of the attor- 
neys representing this department. 

5. The settlements in those cases were according to law and were 
just and proper. Neither I nor any of my assistants received a cent, 
directly or indirectly, from those cases, and the District and County 
Attorneys received only what they were entitled to under the law. 

I invite the investigation of all my official acts by the Legislature, 
and especially my conduct of the Waters-Pierce Oil Company case 
and of the anti-trust cases which have heretofore been settled. 



The Political Life-Story of a fallen Idol 205 

CHAPTER XII. 
BAILEY'S SECOND INVESTIGATION (WHITEWASH) 1907. 

DUNCAN INVESTIGATION RESOLUTION. 

The Thirtieth Legislature of Texas was convened, at Austin, 
Tuesday, January 8, 1907. The first two days of the session were con- 
sumed in preliminary organization work, but on the third day there- 
of Hon. John M. Duncan of Tyler, joined by thirty-one members of 
the lower House, offered a resolution in the lower House, recitmg 
the fact that Senator Joseph W. Bailey had been charged "through 
the press and in public statements and addresses" with "certain 
charges affecting the character and integrity of Hon. Jos. W. Bailey, 
candidate for re-election to the United Stattes Senate from this State." 
Then followed a recitation of the major charges with reference to 
Mr. Bailey's long concealed connection with Pierce and the Waters- 
Pierce Oil Company in its re-admission to Texas in 1900, and Mr. 
Bailey's efforts in behalf of said Company in opposition to the ad- 
verse legislation offered in the Texas Legislature in the year 1901. 
Said resolution also recited Mr. Bailey's connection with John H. 
Kirby and the Kirby Lumber Company and the Tennessee Central 
Railway Company, as well as with the Security Oil Company and 
the Southwestern Oil Company. The resolution adverted, also, to 
Bailey's connection with David R. Francis and the purchase of the 
Gibbs $100,000 ranch, in Dallas county, by Mr. Bailey through 
David R. Francis in 1900. All of which connections and transac- 
tions the resolution declared were improper and in violation of his 
duty to the people of Texas. The resolution concluded in these 
words: "Whereby and by reason of the aforesaid facts and circum- 
stances so charged, it is further charged that the said Joseph W. 
Bailey has proved himself unworthy, disqualified and totally unfit for 
the position of United States Senator from the State of Texas." 

ATTORNEY GENERAL R. V. DAVIDSON INVITES INVESTIGATION. 

The Duncan Resolution (House Journal, p. 336-346) also re- 
cited the fact that Hon. R. V. Davidson and his official assistants 
had been charged as being engaged "in a conspiracy to injure, defame 
and defeat for United States Senator the Hon. Jos. W. Bailey," and 
that they were using "certain forged documents, letters and papers." 
Of course, nobody ever made these suggestions about Attorney Gen- 
eral Davidson and his assistants, except Bailey himself. 

The Duncan resolution, therefore, called for an investigation of 
both T- W. Bailey and R. V. Davidson with reference to these vari- 
ous matters and provided: "For this purpose a special committee of 
seven shall be selected from this House, to be chosen and nominated 
by the Speaker, to act with a like committee on the part of the Sen- 



206 Senator J. W. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

ate, should one be chosen by that body and so authorized." The 
Resolution further provided for the organization of a committee and 
granted it "all the powers now possessed by the district courts of this 
State," in the matter of securing testimony, and allowed the commit- 
tee in question to sit in open session at any place within the State of 
Texas, in the city of St. Louis and in the city of New York; also that 
"the parties involved in said charges shall be entitled to be repre- 
sented before said committee either in person or by attorneys, or by 
both, and shall be entitled to participate in the conduct of the investi- 
gation." This resolution was signed by the following members of 
the Lower House: "John M. Duncan, E. C. Gaines, R. L. Cable, 
B. F. James, Lea Beaty, J. A. Dodd, T. H. McGregot, S. E. John- 
son, Jr., A. C. Wilmeth, Wm. A. Cocke, Joe A. Adkins, L A. Daniel, 
S. E. Stratton, C. E. Gilmore, D. M. Reedy, W. A. Trenckmann, 
A. S. Crisp, E. A. Camp, Geo. A. Bell, Geo. B. Terrell, M. G. 
Jackson, C. H. Jenkins, John T. Currey, Jno. T. Browne, F. Werner, 
Claude M. McCallum, E. C. Lively, Will E. Orgain, Russell Sav- 
age, Phil H. Clements, C. E. Terry, L A. H. Nelson." 

The resolution was read and a second reading was called for. 
A. M. Kennedy, Bailey's floor leader, objected to a second reading 
of the resolution, which objection was over-ruled. He then raised 
a point of order that was sustained, and the resolution had to be laid 
on the speaker's table until the following day. Thus began the long 
legislative struggle to secure a thorough and complete investigation 
of Mr. Bailey's conduct on the one side, and Mr. Bailey's strenuous, 
persistent and significant efYorts to avoid such an investigation. 

The following contemporaneous comments and review show 
how vigilantly Bailey and his partisans fought, first, to avoid an in- 
vestigation and, second, failing in that design, then to so circumscribe 
the same as to endeavor to shut oflf the light and block the way to the 
real facts. How nearly they succeeded, to the shame of Texas, is 
shown by the events which followed. 

ATTITUDE OF BAILEY MEN. 

Austin, Texas, January 8, (Dallas News, Jan. 9), 1907. — ^^The 
Bailey forces are opposed to an investigation; some of them have told 
The News correspondent that 95 per cent, of the House alone are 
opposed [to an] investigation, and that on joint ballot there will be 
something like 120 votes against an investigation, the total member- 
ship being 162. 

"During the recent campaign in this county, some of the Bailey 
speakers mentioned the fact that Austin would want appropriations 
for the State institutions located here. These remarks were inter- 
preted as a warning that Austin might in the primary election injure 
its chances to get appropriations." 

WILL CALL FOR A BILL OF PARTICULARS INSTEAD OF BILL OF DISCOVERY. 

Austin, Texas, Jan. 9. — No statement of the Bailey caucus was 
given out. The purpose, it is said, was to give the legislators a chance 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 207 

to hear Senator Bailey. About seventy-five members attended, it is 
stated, and the sense of the majority was that a demand should be 
made upon those calling for an investigation to make specific charges 
of matters not already admitted, and that a resolution calling for a 
general investigation should be opposed; in other words, that they 
should call for a bill of particulars instead of a bill of discovery." — 
Dallas News, Jan. lo, 1907. 

"dilatory tactics adopted." 

"kennedy leads fight." 

Austin, Texas, Jan. lo, (Dallas News, Jan. 11), 1907. — "John 
M. Duncan attempted to call up the resolution and he led the fight 
in its behalf. * * * Thereupon Mr. Kennedy called attention 
to the fact that the time for consideration of resolutions had expired 
and so the matter went over." 

After considerable preliminary cross firing, Mr. Kennedy said: 
"I raise the point of order that the resolution carries an appropriation 
and should therefore be referred to the Committee on Finances." 
This point of order was finally overruled whereupon Mr. T. D. 
Cobbs, the Southern Pacific Railroad land lawyer, moved "to post- 
pone consideration of this resolution until next Wednesday," which 
motion was lost in a maze of preliminary wrangling. Finally Mr. 
Kennedy announced: "I make the further point of order that this 
being a simple resolution, the half hour for the consideration of res- 
olutions has expired." 

"The Speaker — The point of order is well taken. (Applause 
from the Bailey faction.) This closed the discussion for the day. 
And thus the Senator's exposure was further prolonged. 

Austin, Texas, Jan. 12, House Journal, page 79. 

"Judge Duncan — Mr. Speaker, * * * i move that the 
reading and reference to bills be now suspended. 

"Mr. Kennedy (Bailey Floor Leader) — Mr. Speaker, I would 
like to know why the gentleman from Smith desires to have this done. 

"Judge Duncan — Mr. Speaker, I desire to do it and will say to 
the gentleman from McLennan because it is my desire to have it 
done (great applause). [The purpose was to call up the Duncan 
Resolution calling for an investigation of Mr. Bailey. '\ 

"Mr. Kennedy — It is my desire to have it not done. I desire to 
order the report of the Committee on Rules." 

KENNEDY OFFERS A BAILEY SUBSTITUTE. 

Austin, Texas, January n, (Dallas News, January 12), 1907. — 
Mr. Kennedy, the leader of the Bailey faction on the floor of the 
House, this afternoon gave out the following statement: Here fol- 
lowed an interview with Mr. Kennedy and then the text of the Ken- 
nedy substitute resolution, which contained twenty-tvvo paragraphs 
of about 1,600 words, as given to the press for the public's perusal. 
The Kennedy substitute as actually introduced in the House, how- 



208 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

ever, contained only eight paragraphs of about six hundred words, 
and thus were the people of Texas sought to be deceived as to just 
what the Baileyites in the Thirtieth Legislature of Texas were doing. 
Kennedy's Bailey substitute resolution was not only a substitute for 
the Duncan Resolution, but was a subterfuge as well. 

BAILEY ISSUES A STATEMENT. 
SAYS HE WOULD RATHER BE INDICTED AS A CITIZEN THAN INVESTI- 
GATED AS A SENATOR. 

Austin, Texas, January lo, (Dallas News, January 13), 1907. — 
In order to overcome the State wide indignation at the opposition 
which he and his friends had exhibited toward an investigation, Mr. 
Bailey gave out a statement in part as follows: 

"There is not the semblance of truth in the statement which has 
been sent out from Austin to the efifect that my friends are seeking 
either to prevent or to delay an investigation [what a lie!]. I am 
more than ready to meet any charge that any responsible man may 
make against me and I will answer it without asking a moment's de- 
lay. [At Graham, Texas, December 31, 1906, Mr. Bailey said, 
'There will be no investigation, because there will be no man in the 
Texas Legislature tliat will be willing to stand up and say that he can 
prove anything to my discredit.' If he was, in fact, willing 'to meet 
any charge,' why then did he always refuse to be examined by the 
proponent of the charges or by his attorneys?] * * * As I now 
recall it, Texas is the only Southern State that has ever thought it 
necessary to investigate the conduct of a Democratic Senator, [this 
is the first time it was ever necessary], and that alone would impress 
every thoughtful man with an idea that an investigation ought not to 
be proposed or ordered, except upon grave charges which those who 
made them would hold themselves bound to prove." 

This opposition on the part of Mr. Bailey recalls very vividly the 
language used by him in the United States Senate in igot; in his 
speech moving to expel United States Senator Burton from the Sen- 
ate, in which address will be found the following language: "The 
rule is different here from that which prevails in the courts. There 
as a safeguard to the liberty of the citizen, he must have his guilt es- 
tablished beyond a reasonable doubt; here the rule ought to be that 
he must free himself from all appearance of wrong doing beyond a 
reasonable doubt." 

"The commonest negro in Texas cannot be tried for a petty theft 
except upon a specific charge preferred against him," continued Mr. 
Bailey, "and supported by the oath or affirmation of some witness. 
Certainly the Democrats of Texas do not regard the reputation of 
their Senator as entitled to less protection than the law affords to an 
ignorant and vicious negro." 

An alleged crime committed by "the commonest negro in Texas," 
as well as the most exalted "Senator" from Texas, may be investi- 
gated by the grand juries of Texas without let or hindrance, just as 



The Political Life-Story of a fallen Idol 209 

the Investigation Committee of the Thirtieth Legislature ought to 
have investigated and then returned its bill of indictment to the whole 
body of the Legislature to act as a petit jury. 

"The Kennedy substitute," continued Mr. Bailey, "will reveal 
the fact that a more searching investigation can be conducted under 
the substitute than under the resolution [Duncan resolution]. 
* * * " 

When Mr. Bailey wrote those words, it should be remembered 
the Kennedy substitute had not been amended as they afterwards 
found it necessary to amend it in order to pass it. The substitute as 
advocated by Mr. Bailey when he made the above statement did not 
give the Committee power to sit anywhere else than at Austin, nor 
to summon witnesses, but only "to hear any witness or witnesses who 
may present themselves before said committee and file a charge or 
charges against Senator Bailey, which would affect his qualification 
as a Senator and render him unfit to serve in said capacity by reason 
of official misconduct or conduct that amounted to malfeasance in 
office and after hearing any credible witness who may present what 
the Committee may deem evidence of sufficient weight to fairly raise 
an issue on a disputed point between Senator Bailey and his critics, 
the said Committee shall without delay report to the House for its 
future action, the evidence offered, together with the nature of the 
charge on which it is based and the scope of an investigation war- 
ranted by same, if any investigation in the Committee's judgment be 
deemed justified." (This was, also, the language of the Looney 
resolution as passed by the Senate and under which the Senate Com- 
mittee acted.) 

It will thus be seen that Mr. Bailey was not to be investigated at 
all under the substitute which he advocated, but proposed that the 
commitee might listen to any voluntary witness or witnesses and then 
recommend to the House WHETHER OR NOT THERE SHOULD BE AN IN- 
VESTIGATION. 

Mr. Bailey's statement continued : "The people of Texas cannot 
be deceived into believing that I desire to prevent or to postpone an 
investigation. * * * AH the people of Texas will easily per- 
ceive that the substitute offered by my friends forms a wider and more 
searching investigation than the original resolution." Verily "our 
Joe" is a great reasoner, but a close analysis of his reasoning reminds 
the author of an article which appeared in the Kansas City Star in 
the fall of 1906, as follows: 

THE TEXAS HUDIBRAS. 

Senator Bailey of Texas has demonstrated at least one quality to 
support his earlier reputation as a "great constitutional lawyer." He 
has displayed a technical ability to advance distinctions which do not 
exist. This modern Sir Hudibras could not only "split a hair twixt 
south and southwest side," but he could box the compass in that 
process. With much vehemence this injured public servitor declared 



210 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

in a public letter the other day that any person was "a liar" who would 
say that Bailey of Texas had ever received money from the Standard 
Oil Company. Under the pressure of necessity he now states that he 
was loaned $150,000 by H. Clay Pierce, head of the Waters-Pierce 
Oil Company, which in turn is a subsidiary of the Standard trust. 

Thus is Bailey vindicated; thus is truth acknowledged as sov- 
ereign in the Senator's bosom; thus is disclosed the cruel injustice 
which has been done to an able trust buster, and thus, by analogy, 
may one appreciate that established principle of justice that an in- 
dictment is defective which charges that the defendant killed a man 
with a pistol when it is clear that the victim was killed by the bullet. 

One paragraph of Mr. Bailey's statement, above referred to, try- 
ing to e.xplain to the public why he and his friends were opposing an 
investigation, was as follows: "I would rather be indicted as a citi- 
zen in private life than to be investigated as a Senator from Texas, 
and the fact that my exoneration will follow an inquest into my con- 
duct would no more reconcile me to the investigation than the fact 
that a citizen, acquitted upon a trial, would be reconciled to having 
been indicted." This reasoning is fallacious and misleading, for Mr. 
Bailey as a Senator and a candidate for re-election had already been 
indicted on the stump and through the press of Texas and the Nation 
at the time he wrote those words and a thorough investigation of the 
charges so made and then pending could not add anything to his 
discomfiture if he was in fact guiltless and willing for his record to 
be laid bare to the world. The truth is, he knew that a real investi- 
gation would result in his conviction in the public mind, if not before 
his servile political henchmen in the Texas Legislature. He was 
using every artifice to defeat an investigation and to mislead the pub- 
lic by such statements as the above. 

BAILEY MEN STAND PAT. 

Austin, Texas, January 13, (Dallas News, January 14), 1907. — 
"Mr. Kennedy denied that his side would ofifer to amend the substi- 
tute so as to authorize the committee to compel the attendance of wit- 
nesses." Such was the character of investigation desired by Mr. 
Bailey and his friends. 

BAILEY SELLS HIS FARM. 

Special to The News. 

Lexington, Ky., Jan. 13. — Senator J. W. Bailey of Texas yes- 
terday sold to Rear Admiral C. C. Todd of Frankfort, Ky., his farm 
on the Versailles pike near this city for $24,000. The tract contains 
100 acres and is known as the Freeman fnrm. It has been the home 
of Senator Bailey's trotting brood mares." 

This was only one of his Blue Grass farms. 

BAILEY TO THE PRESS. 

Austin, Texas, January 16, (Dallas News, January 17), 1907. — 
At a late hour Senator Bailey gave out a statement complaining that 



The Political Life-Story of a falloi Idol 211 

he had not been permitted to look at the papers in the possession of 
the Attorney-General, claiming that the common criminal has the 
right to inspect the evidence against him. In this he seemed to for- 
get that the criminal has no such right until he shall come to trial, 
however much the grand jury might inspect and consider the testi- 
mony in ascertaining whether or not it should return a bill of indict- 
ment. 

Referring specially to the fact that his name appeared in the 
Waters-Pierce and Standard Oil Company's code book under the 
designation of [Senator] "Republish," Mr. Bailey excused the ap- 
pearance of his name therein by saying "that idle telegraph operators 
and others should not be able to repeat matters which were intended 
only for parties interested. An examination of the code will show 
that my name was not printed in the book, but was placed there for 
the purpose of enabling Mr. Pierce to communicate with me and me 
with him. * * * " 

Of course Mr. Bailey's name was not printed in that book orig- 
inally, because names were purposely left blank in the printing of the 
book in order that they might be filled in from time to time as their 
business with the company and its officers should require. In print- 
ing their code book, the Standard Oil trust could not tell for years in 
advance as to which United States Congressmen and Senators they 
would be able to use in the future. 

"The only significant and controlling fact, however," continued 
Mr. Bailey's statement, "is that the Attorney-General now admits 
that he never had the Henry & Stribling draft. This was a vital and 
decisive item in the controversy." The Attorney-General never at 
any time claimed to have the draft but gave notice to the company 
that they should produce it. Bailey seemed elated on this, the i6th 
day of Januarv, 1907, that he was able to show to the public, though 
falsely simulating in the premises, that the famous draft had not 
shown up in the papers, little expecting at that time that we would 
accidentally stumble on the evidence as we did on February 9, 1907, 
that the draft had in fact been returned to Bailey himself. 

DAVIDSON EXHIBITS STANDARD OIL-BAILEY DOCUMENTS TO THE 
LEGISLATURE. 

On the 1 6th day of January, 1907, the House requested Attorney- 
General Davidson to present for the inspection of the members the 
famous documents in his possession. This he did on the following 
day, accompanied by a written explanation of how, when and whv 
he secured these documents. He left photographic and fac-simile 
copies thereof with the Clerk of the House and invited the members 
of the Legislature to individually inspect the original documents in 
his Department at any time. (House Journal, pp. 131-132.) 



212 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

KENNEDY SUBSTITUTE AMENDED ON JANUARY 17, 1907. 

Mr. Heslep, a Railroad attorney member of the House, offered 
an amendment to the Kennedy Substitute whereby the Speaker of the 
House was authorized to appoint a Committee of seven members 
with "power to administer oaths, compel attendance of witnesses and 
the production of papers, and shall immediately proceed to thor- 
oughly investigate every specific charge that may be filed with them 
against Senator J. W. Bailey; provided, that no charge shall be in- 
vestigated unless some member of this Legislature or other credible 
citizen of this State shall appear before the said Committee and file 
with it a written charge or charges setting out that he has good rea- 
son to believe and does believe that Senator J. W. Bailey has been 
guilty of some conduct, naming the same, which in the opinion of 
such person, should disqualify him or render him unfit to represent 
the people of Texas in the United States Senate. It shall be the duty 
of said committee to immediately make full and complete investiga- 
tion of said charges, and it shall have power to summon witnesses and 
to compel the attendance of same, and to compel the production and 
exhibition of books and papers, and it shall have power to administer 
oaths and punish persons for contempt or for refusing to appear be- 
fore them, and any member of said committee shall have power to 
administer oaths and to issue process for witnesses; and, provided 
further, that said committee may propound interrogatories and take 
depositions under the rules prescribed by law in the conduct of civil 
cases of witnesses who may reside out of the State and under such 
rules as the committee may prescribe." 

It will be observed that this amendment to the Kennedy Substi- 
tute, which Mr. Bailey's partisans found absolutely necessary to pre- 
vent the passage of the Duncan Resolution, really provided for an 
investigation instead of an ascertainment as to whether or not any in- 
vestigation should, in fact, be conducted, as was originally provided 
in the Kennedy Substitute. (House Journal, p. 134.) It will also 
be observed that this amendment provided for the taking of deposi- 
tions, but when the Committee afterwards ordered depositions taken 
of certain unavailable witnesses, Mr. Bailey objected, and, of course, 
the depositions were not taken. 

BAII.EY REQUIRES "SPECIFIC CHARGES." 

Furthermore it will be significantly noted that the Heslep Amend- 
ment to the Kennedy Substitute while providing for an investigation, 
instead of a mere inquiry as to whether or not an investigation should 
be conducted, nevertheless further provided "that no charge shall be 
investigated unless some member of this Legislature or other credible 
citizen of this State shall appear before the said committee and file 
with it a written charge, or charges, * * * and shall immedi- 
ately proceed to thoroughly investigate every specific charge that 
may be filed with them against Senator J. W. Bailey." Bailey had 



The Political Life-Story of a Pollen Idol 213 

previously said that there would be no investigation "because no 
member of the Legislature would dare to come forward and file 
charges against him." Bailey's partisans had first, and at his behest, 
tried to avoid any investigation at all, inasmuch as they said that he 
had admitted practically all the facts involved in the controversy. 
Being driven from that position, they then proposed to appoint a com- 
mittee to find out whether or not an investigation should be conducted 
at all. Realizing that they would have to still further strengthen the 
Kennedy Resolution in order to pass it through the lower House, they 
then proposed to have an investigation, only on condition that "some 
member of this Legislature or other credible citizen of this State shall 
appear before the said committee and file with it a written charge or 
charges." 

BAILEY HAD SAID THERE WOULD BE NO INVESTIGATION. 

At Graham, Texas, December 31, 1906, Mr. Bailey said: "There 
will be no investigation, because there will be no man in the Texas 
Legislature that will be willing to stand up and say that he can prove 
anything to my discredit." While addressing the Legislature on the 
17th day of January and trying to explain away the Waters-Pierce- 
Standard Oil-Bailey vouchers, Mr. Bailey said: "I want to look 
the man in the eye that will file charges against me." As a matter of 
fact he never did look, the proponent of the charges in the eye nor 
would he submit to be examined by him or by his attorneys. (Invest. 
Com. Report, p. 983.) But the point here sought to be impressed, 
is the fact that Bailey and his friends required "specific written 
charges" in their last effort to avoid an investigation, thinking, as Mr. 
Bailey had said, that "no man in the Texas Legislature" would be 
willing to assume that responsibility. 

BAILEY INVITED TO EXAMINE DOCUMENTS. 

On January 17, 1907, T. D. Cobbs, another Railroad Legislator, 
moved the adoption of a resolution, inviting Mr. Bailey "to appear 
before the House at 2 p. m. today and be given the opportunity of 
making any statement he may desire with reference to the vouchers 
and documents exhibited in the House on yesterday." Thereupon 
Mr. Duncan offered the following amendment: "Provided Senator 
Bailey will in connection with such explanation ask this House to 
make a fair, thorough and unlimited investigation by this committee 
of all the facts connected with his conduct while Representative and 
Senator." The amendment was lost by a vote of 69 to 57. (House 
Journal, pp. 137-138) 

PREPARE TO ELECT THEIR SENATOR. 

On January 17, 1907, the majority of a joint committee of the 
House and Senate, appointed for the purpose of arranging for the 
election of a United States Senator, consisting of Senators Willacy 
and Huspeth, and Representatives Bryan, Cobbs, and Robertson of 



214 Senator J. IV. Bailey uf Texas Unmasked 

Travis, made their report. All of these were Bailey men, as after- 
wards appeared, although Robertson at that time was counted as op- 
posed to the practices of Senator Bailey. It afterwards developed 
that he was the retained attorney of H. Clay Pierce in the matter of 
the latter's indictment for perjury or false swearing in Travis County, 
and also Attorney for the Kirby Lumber Company. And still later 
it appears that he became an attorney for the Security Oil Company, 
Bailey's client, in the suit against said company as an arm of the Stand- 
ard Oil Company. This committee recommended that the House and 
Senate proceed to ballot for a United States Senator on January 22nd 
separately and that the Senate and the House should convene, in joint 
session, on January 23rd "for the purpose of declaring the result of the 
previous balloting." 

MINORITY RECOMMENDS POSTPONEMENT. 

Senator W. J. Greer, of Van Zandt County, that quiet, genteel, 
pure and venerable patriot, offered the following minority report: 
"We, a minority of your committee, appointed to report upon the 
mode and manner of electing a United States Senator at this, the first 
session of the Thirtieth Legislature, dissenting from a majority of 
your committee for the purposes above mentioned, file this minority 
report, and recommend that the election of a United States Senator 
be postponed from day to day until the committees appointed to act 
upon the investigation of certain charges against Senator Bailey shall 
have made report, and it shall be acted upon, and we further beg to 
report that in our opinion the Federal statute upon this subject is 
directory and not mandatory." (House Journal, pp. 139-140.) Thus 
the efiforts to postpone Bailey's election until the charges could be 
investigated were futile, as his worshippers and hirelings were pre- 
determined to elect him and afterA\'ards to "exonerate him" though 
guilty of treason to the people, of falsehood and of perjury. Mr. 
Duncan moved to substitute the minority for the majority report but 
Speaker Love sustained a point of order raised by Mr. Hamil- 
ton, a Bailey partisan, bv which a consideration of the Minority Re- 
port was precluded and the Majority Report adopted. (House Jour- 
nal, pp. 146-148.) 

PATTON SUPPORTS KENNEDY SUBSTITUTE. 

I. A. Patton, of Alvarado, who was afterwards appointed by 
Speaker Love as a member of the whitewash committee, on January 
17 made a vehement speech in support of the Kennedy Substitute. 
He afterwards had himself marked "present but not voting" when 
Bailey was elected. There were many who believed that this was a 
trick, understood in advance, by which it could be said that Speaker 
Love appointed three members of the committee who voted for Bailey 
and three against him and one was (?) "non-partisan." Robertson, 
of Travis, was counted among the three who voted against Bailey's 
election, but his vote counted for nothing in fixing his attitude be- 



The Political Lifi'-Story of a PalU'ii Idol 215 

cause his own county, at a special election on January 5th, had in- 
structed him to vote against Bailey, whereas he, in said primary, 
voted for Bailey. (House Journal, p. 149.) 

BAILEYITES AGAIN FORCED TO AMEND THE KENNEDY SUBTERFUGE. 

On the afternoon of January 17th, six Bailey members offered an 
additional vote catcher to the Kennedy subterfuge, by which it was 
provided that the proposed committee should "have authority, and it 
shall be its duty to authorize and empower two of its members to pro- 
ceed to a point beyond the State of Texas, at which point said testi- 
mony can be procured, for the purpose of procuring same, and pre- 
senting same to the committee." (House Journal, p. 151.) But the 
sub-committee did not "proceed." When the time came for the sub- 
committee "to proceed" to St. Louis, to Washington, and to New 
York, as well as to other points to get additional evidence, including 
Pierce's testimony, Bailey told the committee that he must hurry 
back to Washington and be sworn in as Senator from Texas on the 
4th day of March, 1907; that Texas must not be without a Senator. 
He arrived at Washington on the last day, in time to collect his 
$700.00 mileage, having missed the entire session, although when he 
returned to Texas, December 2nd, he gave out an interview that he 
had "missed his train in St. Louis," but that it would take him just 
two days "to attend to Davidson" and to drive the balance of "his 
enemies, thieves, liars, scoundrels, hyenas, dogs, hessians, perjurers, 
socialists and anarchists," all into the Gulf of Mexico. 

SPEAKER LOVE APPOINTS INVESTIGATION (?) COMMITTEE. 

On Saturday, January 19, 1907, Speaker Thomas B. Love an- 
nounced the appointment of O'Neal, Robertson of Travis (Pierce's 
lawyer), Cobbs ( a Southern Pacific Railroad Company land law- 
yer), Jenkins, Wolffe (a vicious follower of the Standard Oil Sena- 
torial disgracer of Texas), McGregor and Patton as the investigation 
committee to act under the said Kennedy Substitute as finally amended 
and adopted by a vote of 69 to 51. 

COCKE FORMULATES WRITTEN CHARGES. 

For several days it had become apparent that the Bailey faction 
would so amend the Kennedy subterfuge as to bring over a sufficient 
number of the members as to insure its adoption. During the debates 
on the Duncan Resolution and the Kennedy Substitute, one W. E. 
McConnell, of Palo Pinto County, a vociferous Bailey "rooter," 
made a violent and fiery speech in laudation of the Standard Oil Sen- 
ator from Texas and in condemnation of those members of the Legis- 
lature who sought, on behalf of the people of Texas, to investigate 
Bailey's alleged misconduct. McConnell, while not sleeveless, was, 
nevertheless, coatless during his denunciatory harangue, in the course 
of which he charged the supporters of the Duncan Resolution as be- 
ing "cowardly poltroons" and as not possessing sufficient grit and 



216 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

nerve to file specific written charges against his idol. Then it was that 
the author determined if necessary to insure an investigation, to him- 
self formulate and file the charges that had already become public 
property, or rather a public scandal. This was not expected by the 
Baileyites — hence their very great dislike of the author since. They 
have slandered, maligned and sought to discredit the proponent of the 
charges from Brownsville to the Panhandle, from El Paso to Te.xar- 
kana, from Del Rio to Orange, because he did what he thought was 
his duty under the circumstances and the very thing that Mr. Bailey 
and his supporters invited to be done. Now, if Mr. Bailey was inno- 
cent and was, in fact, exonerated, why is it that Bailey and his sup- 
porters do not thank the proponent of the charges for the unpleasant 
part that some one was forced to perform in order that the oil, sltme 
and slander, as they claim, could be washed from the robes of their 
political lord and master? Echo answers why? 

CHARGES FILED SATURDAY, JANUARY 19TH. 

Every word of the charges were written by the author on Friday 
and Saturday and were filed with Chairman O'Neal, Saturday even- 
ing, about 9 o'clock, January 19th. They were at the same time 
mailed to Senator Green, Chairman of the Senate Committee. Mr. 
Bailey and his subsidized forces, the Houston Post, Ft. Worth Rec- 
ord and Austin Statesman, have repeatedly said that the proponent 
of the charges was used as a tool by Bailey's more prominent enemies 
in Texas and that they prepared the charges. Such was not the case. 
The charges were written by the author and that without consultation 
with or suggestions from a single one of Mr. Bailey's then so-called 
enemies either in or out of Texas. The information upon which the 
charges were based had been collected from time to time since the 
exposures of the fall of 1906 and especially after the publication of 
the Waters-Pierce-Standard Oil voucher records in November, 1906. 

There are those who have thought that fewer charges should have 
been filed, even though the whole number were true. If the propo- 
nent of the charges had known that the so-called investigation was to 
develop into a partisan suppression, he, too, might have taken that 
view, but supposing that a real inquiry into the truth or falsity of the 
charges, which were made on "information and belief" would be 
conducted, it was thought wise to finally and fully dispose of all the 
matters involved, to the end that the Senator might in fact be exon- 
erated or convicted thereof as the proof should authorize. 

Remembering how unfair Hon. D. A. McFall had been treated 
six years before by the Twenty-Seventh Legislature, which also con- 
ducted a mock investigation of Bailey in 1901, and seeing how unfair 
and unscrupulous were the methods of Bailey and his obedient dupes, 
the proponent of the charges reserved the right in filing them to with- 
draw the charges unless he should be permitted to be present, and as- 
sist in person, or by attorney, of his own selection, in the development 
of the facts. This feature will be discussed under the chapter en- 
titled, "The Methods of the Committee." 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 217 

BAILEYITES AGAIN REFUSE TO POSTPONE ELECTION. 

On Monday, January 21, 1907, Hon. J. M. Duncan, floor-leader 
of the investigation forces, and Hon. Geo. B. Terrell, offered a reso- 
lution recognizing the fact that an investigation had been provided 
for and a committee appointed and charges filed. The House had 
already refused to adopt Senator Greer's minority report proposing 
to postpone the ballot for a United States Senator and the Speaker, 
having held that balloting under the United States Statute must be- 
gin on Tuesday, January 22nd, the Duncan and Terrell Resolution 
provided : "Resolved, That it is the sense of this House that we obey 
the Federal Statute in regard to the election of a United States Sena- 
tor by meeting from day to day and balloting as required by law for 
a United States Senator, but that we use our best efforts to prevent the 
election of a United States Senator until a full, complete and thor- 
ough investigation is had upon all of the charges, as contemplated in 
the resolution, and report containing all of the material facts bearing 
upon the charges made, shall be presented to or adopted by this 
House; be it further 

"Resolved, That it is not our intention or desire to defeat for re- 
election Senator J. W. Bailey, but it is our sole purpose to withhold 
our judgment and votes in this matter until all the facts are known 
and we submit that this can be done without violence to the law, 
without prejudice to Senator Bailey and with the highest regard for 
the best interests of the Democratic party and the welfare of the peo- 
ple, by simply casting our votes for some citizen of our own district 
who is not now a candidate for this office and who may never be seri- 
ously considered for such position, each voting for a different man, 
thereby scattering the votes and preventing the election of any man 
until the investigation is completed and all of the facts are before 
the House so that each member can act intelligently and base his vote 
upon the material facts brought out in this investigation; and, be it 
further 

"Resolved, That in the event Senator Bailey is exonerated of all 
of the material charges against him, we hereby agree to support him 
for election and send him back to the United States Senate with all 
of the power and influence that the great State of Texas through her 
representatives can bestow upon him." (House Journal, p. 168.) 
This resolution was killed by dilatory tactics on the part of Bailey's 
partisans. (House Journal, pp. 168-172.) 

BAILEY REFUSES TO GO BEFORE THE PEOPLE OF TEXAS. 

On Tuesday morning, January 22nd, about two hours before the 
time for the election of a United States Senator, Hon. John M. Dun- 
can, of the pro-investigation forces, sought to refer the whole contro- 
versy to the people of Texas, as shown by the following resolution: 
"Resolved, That it is the sense and judgment of this body that the 
issues involved in the choice of United States Senator, under the ex- 



218 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

isting circumstances, should be determined directly by the entire 
membership of the Democratic party of this State, and to the end that 
their sovereign will may control, we recommend, 

"i. That Senator Bailey shall, before the first ballot for Senator, 
send a communication in writing to this Legislature and pledge him- 
self to immediately resign and renounce the office of United States 
Senator, to which he may be elected, if he shall be elected, and at 
once go before the whole body of the Democracy and give them an 
opportunity to pass upon his candidacy, with the understanding that 
the investigation of the pending charges and any others filed and ac- 
cepted by the committee, shall proceed to a conclusion as contem- 
plated by the resolution under which the committee was appointed. 

"2. In the event that Senator Bailey shall adopt the course above 
suggested, we who vote for this resolution pledge ourselves to vote 
upon ballot today for his re-election and to urge and to use our utmost 
endeavors to secure such a period of time for the making of a cam- 
paign as will be acceptable to Senator Bailey, and also to abide by the 
result of said general Democratic primary as indicated by the ma- 
jority of all the votes cast in said election, and to vote in accordance 
with the wishes of such majority. We further pledge ourselves to en- 
deavor to secure action upon said result during the present session of 
the Legislature." 

This resolution died a parliamentary death at the hands of Bailey's 
swordsmen, and thus were the people of Texas denied the privilege 
of passing upon Bailey's guilt or innocence, fitness or lack of fitness 
for the United States Senate. (House Journal, page 178.) 

BAILEY ELECTED WITH CHARGES PENDING. 

At 12:15 p. m., Tuesday, January 22nd, 1907, the House pro- 
ceeded to the election of a United States Senator and the name of J. 
W. Bailey was placed in nomination by W. L. Blanton. J. F. Onion, 
of San Antonio, was among those who seconded his nomination. 
Among other things Mr. Onion said: "I earnestly believe that the 
great and peerless Bailey, the Bailey whom Texas loves, will come 
through this ordeal with honor unsullied, with reputation untar- 
nished — with his fame undiminished. Bailey is for Texas. Texas 
is for Bailey. Stand by your instructions. Stand by Democracy. 
Stand by your constituents. Stand by the Democratic nominee. To- 
day will be memorable in the political annals of Texas. Our action 
today will be heralded wherever civilization exists. When the ballot 
shall be announced it will go forth to an eagerly expectant world, that 
Bailey the superb, Bailey the matchless, Bailey the incomparable, 
has been returned to the United States Senate from Texas." (House 
Journal, pp. i8c-i86.) 

This "matchless" eulogy is calculated to call forth a smile of de- 
rision. Its ludicrousness is amusing. If Mr. Bailey had been or was 
now all that Mr. Onion claims for him, he would have come through 
the ordeal "with reputation untarnished — with his fame undimin- 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 219 

ished." As a matter of fact, however, his name has become a hiss 
and a by word with unnumbered thousands of Texans and his pres- 
tige absolutely gone before the nation, as is shown by the editorial 
press comments of all papers and of all parties everywhere. Great 
is the pity! If Bailey's official life had not been one of sham and 
pretense and his fidelity to the people had been commensurate with 
his loud professions and with his acknowledged ability, he might 
have been President of the United States — likely he would have been, 
at least, the Democratic nominee for that great office. "As a man 
sowcth, so also shall he reap." 

BAILEY H.-^D TO PROMISE TO RESIGN. 

Mr. Bailey received 89 votes in the lower House out of a total 
number of 131. At his election six years previous he had received 
every vote cast save four, and that, too, at a time that he did not claim 
to be the nominee. There is no doubt but that he would have lost this 
election except for the timidity, temerity, and cowardice of a consid- 
erable number of those who voted for him, because they did not have 
the courage to stand up boldly for what they knew to be right and 
trust their constituents to uphold them therein. Others voted for him 
for a reward, past, present or prospective, political, monetary or 
otherwise; others voted for him out of fear of punishment. 

Still others voted for him because he promised to resign in case 
the investigation committee "found him guilty of any charge." 
Among those who voted for him on his promise to resign was Hon. 
S. W. Dean, as shown by House Journal, page 202, in which Mr. 
Dean recorded his reasons for his vote, as follows: "I vote for Sen- 
ator Bailey because I believe a large majority of my constituents are 
in favor of his re-election. I am not instructed by primary election, 
but am not above substituting the will of my people for my own; on 
the contrary, desire to reflect their will in my vote. My own per- 
sonal convictions are antagonistic to this vote, but Senator Bailey has 
given me his personal assurance that if the committee now investi- 
gating charges against him should find him guilty of any charge, and 
which finding should be sustained by the House or Senate, or if the 
House or Senate should pass a vote of censure or even want of confi- 
dence in him, that he would resign in thirty seconds. I therefore do 
not fear to vote for him." Mr. Dean afterwards voted against his 
exoneration. 

OTHER MEMBERS GIVE REASONS FOR THEIR VOTES. 

Hon. E. C. Gaines, of Comanche County, had been instructed to 
vote for Mr. Bailey by a second and recent primary in his county, 
which primary had been very lightly attended. Mr. Gaines was one 
of the most forceful orators and cogent reasoners of the Thirtieth 
Legislature. On House Journal, page 198, will be found Mr. Gaines' 
reason for his vote, in part as follows: "Such has been my view, and 
I have not changed my view. I also said that individually I was con- 



220 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

vinced beyond a reasonable doubt that Senator Bailey was substan- 
tially guilty of all the infamous conduct with which he was charged. 
The vote has not changed my opinion in that respect. 

"Such having been my position and promise to the people of 
Comanche County, I feel in honor bound to cast their vote for J. W. 
Bailey. In my judgment it is a grievous error, but it is their error, 
not mine. They have agreed to assume the responsibility, and I pass 
it up to them. 

"In my own opinion, Bailey is not only unworthy of the great 
office of Senator, but he is absolutely infamous. I regard him as I do 
any other criminal. I cannot escape the conclusion that he is a traitor 
to his country who has betrayed his people into the hands of a com- 
mercial pirate for gold. Left to vote my own sentiments, I would 
gladly defy all his minions of infamy and vote against him; but a 
man must live up to his ideals. My ideal of good government is one 
in which the people's will is supreme. I think it better for a Rep- 
resentative to vote for a bad man; yea, a moral leper as I believe 
Bailey is, than to shatter an ideal of representative government, the 
observance of which is the hope of the Nation, and break faith with 
his people. 

^^Haznng discharged 'with scrupulous fidelity' my promise to my 
people, I desire to take my place for the future among those who 
despise and defy him." 

Hon. J. C. Kindred, of Weimar, (House Journal page 201) used 
the following language: "I am not voting against Mr. Bailey, but 
for a principle involved, which is more ancient than the 'Golden 
Fleece' or the 'Roman Eagle.' There are grave charges preferred 
and now pending against the Senator. A full, fair and thorough in- 
vestigation has been ordered by unanimous vote of the House, which 
is now being prosecuted by a committee of seven members of the 
House appointed for the purpose. Mr. Bailey is represented (as 
is his right) by at least three eminent and capable lawyers of his own 
selection and choice, while it has been substantially denied the State 
and Representative Cocke of Bexar, who filed the said charges, the 
privilege of representation by counsel, to be chosen, either by the 
House or by Representative Cocke. I did not come irrevocably 
committed to vote for or against Mr. Bailey, but I came believing 
such an investigation as has been ordered would be had and con- 
cluded before election day, and hoping that Mr. Bailey might be 
honorably discharged of all pending charges against him. That 
has not been done, — hence my conscientious vote to postpone." 

Hon. C. H. Jenkins, expressed his sentiments as follows: "If 
the material charges against Mr. Bailey are not sustained by the evi- 
dence, I shall take pleasure in voting for him, if the election of 
United States Senator be then pending in this House. Texas will 
be proud to present to the United States Senate her illustrious cit- 
izen who has come through the furnace of political persecution, if 
such it proves to be; but, on the other hand, if these charges be 



The Political life-Story of a Fallen Idol 221 

proven by competent and satisfactory evidence, and our idol be 
crushed by truth, we as the representatives of the people should, it 
appears to me, retain in our hands the power to brush from the path- 
way of Texas the fragments of clay, so that she may not be retarded 
in her march to that high destiny which awaits her in spite of the 
shortcomings of any man." 

Hon. George B. Terrell, of Cherokee, gave utterance to his aver- 
sion to Standard Oil in these words (House journal p. 205) : "The 
music of the Standard Oil band wagon has no charms for me, neither 
does its cipher code book contain any secrets that the people should 
not know, and being deprived of an opportunity to know all the facts 
in this great conspiracy against the people before voting for a 
United States Senator, I therefore cast my vote for the Hon. S. P. 
Wilson of Cherokee county, a man who has never been 'investigated' 
and against whom no charge of corruption has ever been made." 

WHY THE AUTHOR VOTED TO POSTPONE BAILEY'S ELECTION. 

The author expressed his view of the situation (House Journal 
page 200) in the following language: "I vote against Mr. Bailey, 
pending the investigation proceedings, for the reason that I can not 
conscientiously vote for a man for the high office of United States 
Senator when charges of the character pending are being investi- 
gated; especially so when by scattering our votes we would postpone 
the election until the investigation committees have completed their 
labors and made their reports. Then, again, Mr. Bailey's opposi- 
tion to an investip-ation raises a grave suspicion of his guilt, not to 
speak of the evidence now known to me, and not to speak of his own 
admissions. 

"Then, too, I regard my duty to the State of Texas and to the 
people of the United States, under the National Constitution and 
under my oath of office, superior to the claims of any party when 
questions of integrity and official honesty are involved. That peer- 
less and fearless patriot and noble Democrat, William J. Bryan, is 
a recent authority for the doctrine that the State is higher than a 
party. Such proposition is axiomatic. 

"Injured innocence, when assailed, never minds the limelight of 
truth; guilt and guilt alone, seeks the dark alleys of oblivion and 
doubt. Innocence and honesty never plead technicalities, delays and 
limitations; guilt, and guilt alone, asks for dates and details, seeking 
at the same time to limit and control the tribunal in which the ac- 
cused is forced to respond. The voice of conscience is the voice of the 
people; that conscience about which Thomas JefTerson wrote to La- 
fayette when he said concerning the rights of the people as against 
his instructions by the nobility: 'Burn your instructions and fol- 
low your conscience, as it is the only true clue which will eternally 
guide a man clear of all doubt and inconsistency.' 

"Shall the voice of the people, which is but an echo from the 
throne of Divinity, be hushed and stilled today, or shall it find 



222 Senator J. W. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

patriotic reverberation in three million honest hearts as they cry out 
to us today: 'Texas and Texas Senators must be and remain spot- 
less and free.' I take pleasure in casting my vote at this time for my 
boyhood friend, Hon. Guy S. McFarland of Bexar county." 

On the following day, January 23rd, the House and Senate met in 
joint session to consummate Mr. Bailey's return to the United States 
Senate, in spite of the effort that had been made to have the pending 
charges thoroughly and impartially investigated prior to final leg- 
islative action in the premises. Thus was the senatorial shame of 
Texas all but complete. It reached its climax during the succeed- 
ino^ five weeks of suppression and intimidation as indulged in by Mr. 
Bailey and his servile tools. The House and the Senate Committees 
which had been appointed for the ostensible purpose of investigating 
his conduct, in fact, became partisan suppressors of the truth. In 
spite of their efforts, however, a perusal of the succeeding chapters 
will show that Mr. Bailev was shown to be guilty of every material 
charge alleged against him. 

bailey's political machine. 

The following critical editorial, descriptive of some of Bailey's 
political machine building methods, appeared in the Dallas News 
of March 18, 1908. While the methods described have been freely 
used, the author is convinced that money, too, in the last few years, 
has played an important part in Bailey's game. The editorial, con- 
servative and mild, is as follows: 

"Senator Bailey is a fast friend to those who befriend him. It is 
doubtful if he has lost a single opportunity in twenty years or more 
to make up to any voter in Texas whom he happened to meet. He 
has put his arm around more ambitious young Democrats to assure 
them of his interest in them and his eagerness to help along their 
laudable ambition, speak in their behalf, to write his friends in sup- 
port of their candidacies, to carry his county or district for them, to 
see that they secured chairmanships or places on committees, to take 
stock in their papers, to support their favorite candidates even as a 
favor to them — Senator Bailey has probably done more of this sort 
of thing than anv other man of his day and generation. He has 
promised consulates and other good things cut of hand to Texans who 
made requests for such favors. He has not lost an opportunity to 
thus endear to him and fasten to his "machine" every man or boy or 
woman in the State with whom he has come in touch. Of course he 
has been extraordinarily successful, not only because of the elements 
of selfishness and deceit usually found in politics of this character, 
but also because of his intellect, fine personality and presence, and 
the better qualities of heart and brain. Of course he has fastened to 
himself thousands whom he has not met by utilizing the influence of 
those whom he has served. By declaring his preference for a candi- 
date for Governor, for example, he would not only secure the sup- 
port of the relatives and friends whom such candidate could per- 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 223 

suade; or by declaring "the Campbells are coming" at an opportune 
time he would silence or capture scores of the friends of another can- 
didate for the same place. He has written letters, or kept his secre- 
tary busy at it, in the interest of a candidate for Lieutenant Governor 
and carried his county for him, and that friendly assistance with 
other kindnesses has bound to him the candidate whom he was al- 
ways ready thus to serve. The list may be extended to include can- 
didates for Congress, for the Legislature, and for even the county 
and local offices. 

"In this way, rather than in the prodigal use of money, as in the 
boss-ridden States, has Senator Bailey built up in Texas a most pow- 
erful 'machine.' " 



224 Senator J. 1 1'. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 



ANTIDOTES FOR BAILEYISM. 



Every man possessing a proper appreciation of the relations and 
prizes of life, would rather possess the respect and loving favor of 
his fellow men, whether in public or private walks, than fame and 
fortune, than stocks and bonds, than houses and lands, than fertile 
farms and fleeting race horses. — The Author. 

The extreme pleasure we take in talking of ourselves should make 
us fear that we give very little to those that hear us. — Rochefoucauld. 

O that estates, degrees, and offices were not derived corruptly, 
and that clear honor were purchased by merit of the wearer. — 
Shakespeare. 

True courage is cool and calm. — The bravest of men have the 
least of a brutal, bullying insolence, and in the very time of danger 
are found the most serene and free. — Shaftsbury. 

The truest courage is always mixed with circumspection; this 
being the quality which distinguishes the courage of the wise from 
the hardiness of the rash and foolish.— 7o«ej of Nayland. 

Some among the children of men have been taught this homely 
truism: "Self-praise is half dog." — The Author. 

The wicked flee when no man pursueth. — The Scriptures. 

True courage is not the brutal force of vulgar heroes, but the firm 
resolve of virtue and reason. — Whitehead. 

Moral courage is a virtue of higher cast and nobler origin than 
physical. — It springs from a consciousness of virtue, and renders a 
man, in the pursuit or defence of right, superior to the fear of re- 
proach, opposition, or contempt. — S. G. Goodrich. 

Courage consists not in hazarding without fear, but being reso- 
lutely minded in a just c^xxst.— Plutarch. 

The time was in the history of American Statesmanship, when 
men were proud to remain poor in public life; to serve their coun- 
try with singleness of heart and purpose was an honorable service, 
and they were honorable and honored men. — The Author. 

As the sword of the best tempered metal is most flexible, so the 
truly generous are most pliant and courteous in their behavior to 
their inferiors. — Fuller. 

See how he sets his countenance for deceit, and promises a lie be- 
fore he speaks. — Dryden. 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 225 

It is a coward who fawns upon those above him.— It is the cow- 
ard who is insolent whenever he dares be so. — Junius. 

Cowards falter, but danger is often overcome by those who nobly 
dare. — Queen Elizabeth. 

Congressman Reed and Senator Spooner found it necessary to 
retire from Congress to improve their private fortunes, as they were 
not willing to improve them at the public expense. — The Author. 

Never will I engage, while in public office, in any kind of enter- 
prise for the improvement of my fortune, nor wear any other char- 
acter than that of a farmer. — Thomas Jefferson. 

A coxcomb begins by determining that his own profession is the 
first; and he finishes by deciding that he is the first in his profession. 
— Colton. 

A coxcomb is ugly all over with the affectation of the fine gentle- 
man. — Johnson. 

Whenever man commits a crime heaven finds a witness. — Bulwer. 

From absolute insolvency to admitted aflluence, seems an easy 
step to the peddler of official influence, — provided the peddler pos- 
sesses brilliancy of the "Standard" variety. — The Author. 

Man's crimes are his worst enemies, following him like shadows, 
till they drive his steps into the pit he dug. — Creon. 

Criticism is the child and handmaid of reflection. — It works by 
censure, and censure implies a standard. — R. G. White. 

Cunning is the ape of wisdom. — Locke. 

Cunning pays no regard to virtue, and is but the low mimic of 
wisdom. — Bolin^broke. 

Daniel Webster's questionable financial transactions, like those of 
a modern Senator (pardon the comparison), will detract from his 
good name for all time, and possibly cost him, too, the Presidency. — 
The Author. 



226 Senator J. W. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 



CHAPTER XIII. 

SUPPRESSION METHODS OF LEGISLATIVE 
COMMITTEES, 1907, 

PRESENT : 

House Investigation Committee, consisting of : O'Neal, Chair- 
man; Wolfe, Cobbs, Patton, Robertson (Attorney for H. Clay Pierce, 
and the Kirby Lumber Company) Jenkins, McGregor. 

Senate Investigation Committee, consisting of: Senators Green, 
Greer, Skinner, Senter (which four would have reported Bailey 
guilty except that the Senate, foreseeing their verdict, summarily dis- 
charged its Committee without permitting it to report) ; Stone, 
Brachfield, Looney (pro-Bailey partisans, not investigators after 
truth) ; also Judge Poindexter as Attorney for Senate Committee. 

Senator Joseph W. Bailey, and his three lawyers, Odell, Hanger, 
Jones. 

William A. Cocke, Proponent of Charges, and his two Attorneys, 
Messrs. Cockrell and Crane, though the latter were both present at the 
same time but one afternoon ; after which for some ten days one or the 
other was present. For more than a month, however, the proponent 
was without legal assistance inasmuch as neither General Crane nor 
Judge Cockrell could remain away from their practice for the entire 
time and no other attorney available to the proponent of the charges 
was acceptable to the Committee. 

Let us review very briefly the incidents that occurred in the 
Texas Senate contemporaneously with the Legislative events in the 
lower House, described in the last chapter. 

SENATOR E. G. SENTER STIRS TEXAS SENATE. 

On January ii, 1907, Honorable E. G. Senter, State Senator 
from Dallas, Texas, introduced the Duncan House resolution in the 
Senate. Which resolution, the substitutes, amendments and the 
action thereon taken from time to time throughout the session 
by Bailey's machine in that body, marks the most inconsistent, 
'treacherous and unworthy legislative conduct known to the annals 
of Texas history. 

SENATORS MAYFIELD AND HOLSEY OFFER RESOLUTION. 

On January 15, 1907, Senators Mayfield and Holsey ofifered the 
following resolution (Senate Journal p. 60) : ^^ Whereas, The Demo- 
cratic party has from time immemorial declared itself as opposed 
to trusts and all kinds of combinations that seek to destroy the free- 
dom and welfare of the people ; and 




WASHING OR WHITEWASHING ? 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 227 

"Whereas, The Democratic party believes that trusts and monop- 
olies are inimical to the best interests of the people; and 

"IVhereas, We believe that no man can consistently and conscien- 
tiously represent the people and at the same time represent the trusts, 
public service corporations and monopolies; therefore be it 

''Resolved, That it is the sense of this Senate that no public serv- 
ant should represent 'these interests' while in the service of his 
people." 

Senator Looney, Bailey's chiefest lickspittle of the Senate, imme- 
diately moved that the above resolution be referred to the Judiciary 
committee of which he was Chairman and its subsequent burial was, 
of course, assured. 

SENATOR SENTER MOVES TO REFER BAILEY ISSUE TO THE PEOPLE. 

On January 22, 1907, Senator Senter moved an adoption of the 
resolution, requesting that Senator Bailey address a communication 
to the Senate in writing "and pledge himself to immediately resign 
the office of United States Senator and go before the whole body of 
the Democracy and give them an opportunity to pass upon his caridi- 
dacy, with the understanding that the investigation of the pending 
charges shall proceed to a conclusion." The resolution further pro- 
vided, in case of its adoption and Senator Bailey's acquiescence, that 
he should be given ample time in which to make a campaign, and 
pledged the supporters of the resolution "to abide by the result of 
said general Democratic primary, as indicated by a majority of all 
the votes cast in said election and to vote in accordance with the wishes 
of such majority." 

Senator Chambers (another one of Bailey's "jumping jacks") im- 
mediately moved to table the motion, which was done by the cus- 
tomary vote of the Senate on all these Bailey questions, and the fol- 
lowing Senators voted to give the people a chance, at that time, to say 
whether or not Senator Bailey was a true representative of the people 
or of the trusts which he had been delegated by the people to control 
and to which he had lent his influence and prestige in return for "per- 
sonal loans" that were never repaid: "Faust, Glasscock, Green, 
Greer, Grinnan, Holsey, Mayfield, Murray, Senter, Stokes." 

LOONEY OFFERS SUBSTITUTE. 

In the meantime B. F. Looney, on January 14th, moved the adop- 
tion of his substitute for the Senter-Bailey Investigation Resolution 
which substitute did not provide for an investigation at all, but pro- 
vided for a preliminary hearing by a Committee of the Senate, "and 
after hearing any credible witness who may present what the com- 
mittee shall deem evidence of suflficient weight to fairly raise an is- 
sue on a disputed point between Senator Bailey and his critics, the 
said committee shall, without delay, report to the Senate for its fu- 
ture action the evidence offered, together with the nature of the 
charge on which it is based and the scope of an investigation war- 



228 Senator ]. ]\' . Bailey of Texas Uiunasked 

ranted by same, // any investigation, in the committee's judgment, be 
deemed justified." 

This is a fair example not only of the dilatory tactics but of the 
miserable subterfuges to which Bailey's partisans of both the Senate 
and the House were put in order, first, to delay an investigation, so 
that Bailey might be elected to the Senate on Tuesday, January 22, 
and second, to defeat an exposure of his improper connections and 
practices by a thorough and searching investigation. 

Numerous amendments to this Substitute by which it was sought 
to obtain from the Senate the power to conduct a real investigation 
of Senator Bailey's conduct were promptly voted down by the Bailey 
partisans in the Senate, as was a resolution separately introduced by 
Senators Green and Skinner calculated to give Attorney General 
Davidson an opportunity to be heard before the Investigation Com- 
mittee on the charges that Senator Bailey had frequently made against 
him and his department with reference to the vouchers, letters and 
documentary evidence connecting Bailey with the Waters-Pierce and 
Standard Oil Companies. (See Senate Journal pp. 51-60). 

The Senate Investigation Committee was appointed on Tuesday, 
January 15, 1907, and the President of the Senate appointed the fol- 
lowing seven Senators as a Committee to act under the Looney Sub- 
stitute, which had been adopted in lieu of Senator Senter's Resolution 
calling for a real investigation of Bailey: "Senators Green, Looney, 
Senter, Brachfield, Greer, Stone and Skinner." It will be observed 
that this Committee was to report to the Senate after a preliminary 
hearing "if any investigation, in the Committee's judgment, be 
deemed justified." 

SENATE COMMITTEE ORGANIZES. 

It will likewise be observed that the Senate Committee had very 
much less latitude under their resolution than did the House Commit- 
tee. Indeed the Senate Committee were instructed to report to the Sen- 
ate "the scope of the investigation warranted by the evidence offered 
and the charges made, if any investigation, in the Committee's judg- 
ment, be deemed justified." Four members of the Senate Committee, 
Looney, Brachfield, Stone and Skinner, had voted for Bailey's elec- 
tion; Senators Senter and Greer had scattered their votes in an ef- 
fort to postpone the election, and Senator Green had marked himself 
"present and not voting." Three members of the Senate Committee, 
therefore, were thought to favor a real investigation. As the investi- 
gation proceeded, Senator Skinner became convinced of Bailey's 
guilt and joined Senators Senter, Green, and Greer in an effort to 
ascertain the real facts. 

The Senate Committee was appointed on January 15th; the House 
Committee on January i8th. The Senate Committee met and or- 
ganized and concluded to employ Judge Poindexter, of Cleburne, 
to represent said committee in the investigation; agreeing, also, that 
the proponent of the charges might be present and propound any 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 229 

questions that he might induce counsel for the Senate committee to 
ask. 

HOUSE COMMITTEE ORGAxNIZES. 

The Committee of the House of Representatives, appointed by 
Speaker Love, consisting of H. A. O'Neal, of Cass County, T. H. 
McGregor, of Harris, J. A. L. Wolfe, of Grayson, I. A. Patton, of 
Johnson, Robertson, of Travis, and Cobbs, of Bexar, met in commit- 
tee room No. i, January 19, 1907, and elected H. A. O'Neal chair- 
man, and J. A. L. Wolfe secretary. Both of these were extreme 
Bailey partisans. 

Robertson, Cobbs and Patton, all Bailey men, were appointed 
as a sub-committee on rules to govern the committee. (Committee 
Report, p. 4) . The sub-committee brought in a set of ten rules which 
were adopted. Rule No. 3 was in part as follows: "The sessions of 
this Committee shall be held at such times as it may designate, and 
only the following named persons in addition to the members of this 
Committee and members of the Senate Committee shall be permitted 
to be present, to wit: 

"The clerk of this Committee, who shall be a competent sten- 
ographer; the bailifif or his assistant; an assistant stenographer, if re- 
quired; Senator Bailey and his attorneys; William A. Cocke may 
also appear with one counsel of his own selection for the purpose of 
interrogating such witnesses as may testify before the Committee; 
representatives of the press, and any person who may be personally 
affected by the evidence offered, while such evidence is being intro- 
duced or commented upon." (Committee Report pp. 4 and 5). It 
will be observed that the public was to be excluded from the hearings. 
It will also be observed that "William A. Cocke may also appear 
with one counsel of his own selection for the purpose of interrogating 
such witnesses as may testify before the committee." This right was 
never in fact accorded. The rule was afterward changed so that the 
proponent of the charges could not have "counsel of his own selec- 
tion" except upon the approval of the committee. Neither was the 
proponent of the charges allowed to interrogate all the witnesses — 
notably the innocent Bailey, nor were his counsel allowed this privi- 
lege, as will be hereinafter shown. 

CIVIL OR CRIMINAL PROCEEDING, WHICH? 

The Kennedy Substitute, under which the committee was acting, 
provided: "Said committee may propound interrogatories and take 
depositions under the rules prescribed by law in the conduct of civil 
cases * * *." (Committee Report p. 4) . 

Rule No. 4. also provided: "The rules of procedure, practice 
and evidence of the district courts of this State shall be observed." 
In civil cases in the district courts of this State and in all other courts 
or original jurisdiction, one party to a controversy niay examine the 
opposite party under oath, without notice to such party or to his 



230 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

counsel. Although the resolution and the rules of the committee 
recognized this as the usual proceeding, nevertheless Bailey and his 
counsel refused to allow the former to be examined until all of the 
witnesses had testified, as will hereinafter appear. 

Rule No. 9 provided that Senator Bailey should not only be im- 
mediately furnished with a copy of all the charges — and this was 
entirely fair and proper — but they were careful also to provide that 
he should "at once" be furnished "with the name or names of such 
witness or witnesses." Bailey's lawyers were insistent upon this rule 
throughout the hearings, and when the witnesses arrived in Austin 
they were immediately "interviewed" by some voluntary and un- 
paid (?) tool of Standard Oil. 

Rule No. 9 provided: "That the Senate Committee are invited 
to sit with the House Committee during the investigation." (Com- 
mittee Report p. 5). It will thus be seen that the two committees 
sat together, although they were acting under very different resolu- 
tions. The two committees, consisting of seven members each, were 
finally equally divided on the question of Bailey's guilt. That is to 
say, four members out of seven of the House Committee reported that 
he was innocent; while four members of the Senate Committee would 
have reported him guilty had not the Senate, seeing that such would 
be the case, summarily discharged its committee, without allowing 
it to make a report. 

SECOND COMMITTEE MEETING. 

On Monday morning, January 21, 1907, the committee met in 
the court room of the court of criminal appeals on the third floor of 
the State capitol. Mr. McGregor offered an amendment to the rules 
as follows: "No. — . Any person who may have preferred charges, 
or who may hereafter prefer charges under the resolutions under 
which this Committee was appointed shall have the right to be pres- 
ent by himself and counsel, not to exceed two, while the charges so 
preferred by such person are under investigation, and such person or 
his counsel shall during such investigation have the right to examine 
witnesses and participate in said investigation." (Committee Report 
p. 15). 

"Mr. McGregor: I thought the rules as read would carry that 
right. But to obviate any question about it and settle it before we 
start into this investigation I submit this amendment and move that 
it be adopted as an amendment to the rules." 

Whereupon Cobbs, of Bexar, the Southern Pacific Railroad law- 
yer, was moved to remark: If we should have such a resolution as 
that passed, every man who might make charges against Senator 
Bailey and every person so making charges with a couple of attorneys 
representing them, this room would have to be enlarged and extended, 
possibly, to include the number of people who might make charges, 
and their attorneys who might come. This Committee has already 
acted. I oppose the amendment to the rules because the Committee 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 231 

contemplated all we were to do upon the subject when the rules were 
prepared and submitted to the Committee, and the Committee dis- 
cussed at that time how they would prepare for the investigation and 
who would be selected to make that examination. Of course, the man 
who is charged with an offense is entitled to be present and confronted 
with the witnesses and have his counsel present, but the Committee 
ought to be confined to its own members in this investigation. (Com- 
mittee Report p. 15). 

COLONEL JENKINS PROTESTS. 

Mr. Jenkins: I understand that under the rules already adopted 
that Senator Bailey should have counsel present. 

Mr. Cobbs: Precisely. 

Mr. Jenkins : Now, Air. Chairman, speaking to the amendment, 
the first objection offered, that it might include too many people and 
the room would not accommodate them, I do not so understand this 
amendment. "Any person who may have preferred charges or who 
may hereafter prefer charges under the resolutions under which this 
Committee was appointed shall have the right to be present by him- 
self and counsel, not to exceed two, while the charges so preferred by 
such person are under investigation." And he would have no right — 
if there were two or more persons who had preferred charges, the 
person who had preferred charges would have no right to be present 
except while the charges preferred by himself were under investiga- 
tion. This room is large enough to accommodate the Committees, 
both of the House and the Senate, and our clerks, Senator Bailey and 
his counsel, and the party preferring the charges and his counsel. 

Now, the gentleman says that Mr. Bailey and his counsel, as a 
matter oif course, would have the right to be present. Yes, the Con- 
stitution and all procedures, so far as I know, in this and other civil- 
ized countries, accord to a defendant in any case, civil or criminal, 
the right to be present, but the same law and the same procedure, the 
same general custom, accords to the plaintiff in every cause the right 
to be present, both by himself and by his counsel, and I do not see 
why it is any more a matter of course that the defendant should be 
present than that the complainant should be present. Now, process 
has been issued in this case, the case of Cocke against Bailey. He is 
the complainant. It occurs to me that under the rules of procedure 
and of common fairness the plaintiff in the cause of action ought to 
be present, both by himself and by his attorneys. If I understand the 
rules of the Senate Committee, they virtually so accord the privilege, 
because they are to select attorneys for the prosecution, and, of course, 
they will select such attorneys as the gentlemen filing the complaint 
would desire. It would be but very little benefit to a party to say he 
should be present by his attorneys, if he could not get such attorneys 
as he desired to represent the cause. It occurs to me that in all fair- 
ness this resolution ought to be adopted. (Committee Report p. 16). 



232 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

WOLFE SAYS NO PROSECUTOR NEEDED. 

Mr. Wolfe: Mr. Chairman, I do not consider this the case of 
Cocke against Bailey. I do not really think that this Committee is 
here to try an issue between these two gentlemen. Surely, the House 
of Representatives would have no authority to appoint us as a Com- 
mittee to come out here and settle a controversy between the gentle- 
men from Bexar and the United States Senator, or a Democratic can- 
didate for United States Senator. This is really — I would not say 
that it was the people against Bailey, but I would say that it was sim- 
ply a Committee appointed by the House of Representatives for the 
purpose of inquiring into certain charges that have been made. I do 
not look upon this as being a prosecution, and therefore I do not con- 
sider that it is necessary to have a prosecutor. (Committee Report p. 

Now, I do not think that it is necessary to have any counsel, pri- 
vate counsel, retained by any private prosecutor in order to do that. 
I do not think that this is any place for exhibiting or ventilating any 
spite, spleen or malice. I think this proceeding should be conducted 
in a dignified manner. Now, I think this is a serious matter to talk 
about, that every man that might prefer charges should have a right to 
be present here himself with a couple of lawyers to represent him. 
One set of charges have been presented by Mr. Cocke — 

Mr. Cobbs: Mr. Wolfe, to illustrate the point of what you and 
I have stated, will you please read this letter I have just received 
to the Committee? 

Mr. Wolfe: At the request of Mr. Cobbs I read this letter: 
[Here followed a letter from a member of the former Investigation 
Committee.] (Committee Report p. 17). 

Mr, Wolfe: (Continuing) — These charges that are preferred 
here likewise can be preferred by any other citizen of this State. 
Under the Amendment proposed, if Mr. A. should come in here and 
make the identical same charges that have been already preferred by 
Mr. Cocke, he would have as much right to be here in person and 
represented by two attorneys as Mr. Cocke himself would under the 
amendment, and so on. I do not think that this Committee should 
lay down any gap here that would permit the people, or any citizen 
of this State who has any axe to grind, or any spleen to exhibit, or any 
malice to manifest, or any desire to do injury — I do not think that 
any gap should be let down by which such an individual as that could 
come here and claim under the rules of the Committee a right to the 
floor and a right to be represented by counsel. 

Now, I say this, Mr. Chairman, I am not averse to having a full, 
fair and complete investigation. [Why apologize or explain then?] 
If it is necessary to have a private prosecutor, then I am in favor of 
this Committee going down before the House this morning and re- 
questing that it be permitted to employ counsel, some man of dignity, 
some man of honor, some man of standing, who will come here and 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 233 

fairly and impartially represent the dignity of the State of Texas and 
not the malice of any coterie of citizens of this State. (Committee 
Report p. i8). 

WOLFE DECLARED THE PROPONENT OF THE CHARGES HAD NO RIGHT 
TO BE PRESENT. 

Mr. Jenkins: You do not contest the right at all of the party 
preferring the charges to be present, do you, under the rules? 

Mr. Wolfe: I think that is altogether within the discretion of 
this Committee. I do not think it is necessary that he be present, and 
I do not think it ivould be depriving him of any constitutional right 
to deny him the privilege, not a bit. This is not a prosecution. He 
is not here as a prosecutor. He has filed on behalf of the House of 
Representatives of the people of the State of Texas, or any way that 
you may put it, a set of charges; has made that specific, which, ac- 
cording to the original resolution in the House, was charged in the 
papers and on the stump without naming anyone. Now, things that 
were charged in that resolution have been made specific. Other things 
that were not intimated in that resolution have been alleged and set 
up here. Now, those are the charges we are here to investigate. I 
do not think that is the case of Cocke against Bailey by any means. I 
think it is simply for the purpose of ascertaining the true facts by 
proper investigation. I would be opposed to the adoption of this 
amendment. As I said before, if the Committee deems it necessary, 
and believes to the end of justice and the proper ascertainment of the 
facts, that the counsel ought to be employed here to conduct the ex- 
amination, outside of the members of the Committee, then I am in 
favor of going down before the House this morning and requesting 
that the Committee be specially given the power to employ someone. 
(Committee Report p. 19). 

COL. JENKINS' REJOINDER. 

Mr. Jenkins: This gives no one the right except the party pre- 
ferring the charges, and at no other time except when the specific 
charges that are being preferred are being acted upon. That gets rid 
of the idea of having the room crowded with people, and if the gen- 
tleman who wrote the letter has a right to be present it is not under 
this amendment but under these resolutions, these rules already 
adopted. 

The gentleman says that he does not consider this a prosecution 
upon the part of anyone, and yet the resolution adopted by the House 
does not allow this Committee to proceed with any investigation until 
somebody shall take upon himself the office of prosecutor, the office 
of informant, at least, or complainant. Now, it is true that we might 
have had resolutions otherwise adopted, and been appointed under 
other resolutions. It is true as a rule of parliamentary proceedings 
that anyone can proceed upon general information, "common things," 
— using the language of the House of Commons. But the House has 



234 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

not seen proper to proceed in that way and some person must become 
complainant. Recognizing that, rule second says: "If any person 
shall file any charge or charges before this Committee against Sen- 
ator Bailey, that come within the scope and purview of the resolution 
under which it is acting, he shall, in so far as he is able to do so, give 
the names of the witnesses," etc. Now, unless some person does that 
there is nothing to investigate. We have been cut ofit by the resolu- 
tion adopted by the House from the general parliamentary custom of 
investigating upon common things. We must investigate, if at all, 
upon specific charges, upon the responsibility of some man. Now, 
that being true, this is a procedure upon the part of a complainant, 
and cannot proceed without it. Recognizing that fact this Commit- 
tee has adopted rule No. 2 : The party filing the charge shall "give the 
names of the witnesses, together with a general description of any 
documentary evidence and the name of the person having custody 
thereof, by which said complainant making the charge believes that 
the same can be proven." Suppose he does that and then it comes 
before us, what do we know? Nothing except that he has given us the 
names of certain parties, and we have been able, by learning their ad- 
dresses, to bring them before us. We do not know what would be ex- 
pected, specially, to be proven by any witness. This rule proceeds 
upon the idea that the complainant does know. He furnishes the in- 
formation in order to have him subpoenaed, and when he gets here, 
who knows anything about it? I am sure I do not. I know very 
little of this controversy. I have had neither the time nor the inclina- 
tion, since its beginning some two months ago, to go into it. Unfor- 
tunately, I was not present during the discussion in the House last 
week, so that I have been cut ofif from that source of information. 
But this Rule No. 2 recognizes the fact that the party who files a com- 
plaint is in possession of, or he thinks he is in possession of, informa- 
tion and knows what a witness will testify, and how can we develop 
the case except he be present, and if he be present his mere presence 
will not assist us. He should be present either by himself to question 
the witness, or by his attorney. (Committee Report p. 20). 

BAILEYITES DISREGARD HISTORIC PRECEDENT. 

Mr. Jenkins: Now, this last suggestion that we go down and ask 
the House to authorize us to employ an attorney strikes me as wholly 
unnecessary. It will involve the expenditure of money. The gentle- 
man says that attorneys who will volunteer ought not to be here. Why 
not? What are attorneys in a case for? They are present to repre- 
sent the two sides. Attorneys are supposed to be partisans. Their 
very employment makes them so, and it has been found in the history 
of jurisprudence that the best way to arrive at the truth is to let each 
side present his case from his standpoint, and then let a judicial body, 
fair and impartial as this Committee is, pass upon it. But we do want 
all of the evidence, and in the wisdom of the jurisprudence of this 
country and all our procedure this is the way to get evidence before a 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 235 

court — not simply to say we will have impartial men to present the 
case, but let the case be presented from each side as strongly as it can, 
and let impartial men pass upon it after all the evidence has been de- 
veloped. I doubt not that these gentlemen are in favor of a full, fair 
investigation, but if they know any other method by which that can be 
accomplished except that that is suggested by this amendment, then 
they are ahead of the times. The courts have never found any other 
method, have never adopted any other method, except that of letting 
each side present its case as strongly as he can. (Committee Report 
p. 20). 

PATTON PAWS THE AIR. 

Mr. Patton: Mr. Chairman, I consider that we are here, this 
Committee, not as prosecutors or vindicators of Senator Bailey, but 
are here to have a full, fair, wide-open, exhaustive investigation of all 
charges that may be preferred or that already have been preferred 
against Senator Bailey. The rules as adopted — and they are right 
and proper in that respect — give to Senator Bailey the right to be 
present in person and by attorney. [Why was it proper and right for 
Bailey "to be present in person and by attorney," and yet not allow 
the proponent of the charges the same privilege?] I believe that this 
Committee, instead of adopting that amendment, ought to employ 
an attorney, independent and outside of this Committee. (Commit- 
tee Report p. 20). 

WOLFE CRAWFISHES. 

Mr. Wolfe: With the consent of Mr. Patton I would like to 
offer the following substitute while he is on the floor. 

Mr. Wolfe offered the following: 

"Any party who, in good faith, presents specific charges as re- 
quired by the resolution may be present during the time such investi- 
gation is being had, and may suggest any questions to the party or 
parties examining the witnesses, which he may deem it necessary to 
be asked." 

Mr. Wolfe: I offer this as a substitute for the amendment of- 
fered by Mr. McGregor. (Committee Report p. 20). 

They seemed fearfully alarmed lest the man who filed the charges 
might ask the witnesses, including the guiltless Bailey, some embar- 
rassing questions. 

It will thus be seen that the Baileyites were driven from one posi- 
tion to another and yielded not an inch of the ground, except in the 
face of insurmountable opposition to their schemes of suppression. 

DALLAS ATTORNEYS OFFER THEIR SERVICES WITHOUT COST TO THE 

STATE. 

The Chairman: * * * I will state, gentlemen of the Com- 
mittee, that I received a telegram yesterday from some gentleman at 
Dallas, which I replied to. 



236 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

The telegram above referred to is substantially in words and fig- 
ures, as follows: 

"Dallas, Texas, January 20th. 
"Hon. Hardy O'Neal, House of Representatives, Austin. 

"The charges preferred by Representative Cocke should be fairly 
and fully investigated. The people of Texas have the right to know 
whether these charges are true or false, and Mr. Bailey has not the 
right and should not have the inclination to obstruct them in their ef- 
fort to ascertain the facts. The proposed rules of procedure, as 
printed in the morning papers, by which your Committee is to be gov- 
erned, are so restrictive and so hedged about, as to preclude the possi- 
bility of any such investigation as that which public opinion 
imperatively demands. Such proposed rules are in violation 
of the commonest principles of justice, not only prohibiting the party 
making the charges from appearing and participating in the presen- 
tation of the evidence in support thereof, but in excluding his pres- 
ence from the Committee; whereas, he should be accorded the privi- 
lege not only of being present, but of active participation, and this, 
with the assistance of counsel of his own selection. Nothing short of 
an investigation so conducted can ever satisfy the disturbed public 
mind, and we insist that the proposed rules be so amended as to af- 
ford an opportunity for a real investigation; and in that event, we 
tender our professional services, without price, to assist Mr. Cocke 
in the presentation of the charges preferred, to the end that the facts 
may be developed and the truth ascertained. Kindly wire us at our 
expense, if our services will be accepted upon conditions specified. 
Please furnish Representative Cocke copy of this. 

"W. L. Crawford, M. M. Crane, J. E. Cockrcll, F. M. Ether- 
ridge, R. C. Porter." 

Chairman O'Neal replied to this telegram: « * * * lean- 
not reply to your request without submitting it to the Committee 
which I shall do tomorrow morning at 10 o'clock * * * " 
(Committee Report p. 23.) 

Mr. McGregor : I move that the ofifer in the telegram expressed, 
be granted. 

The Chairman: Is there a second to the motion? 

Mr. Cobbs: Mr. Chairman, / raise the point of order. It can- 
not be granted, because we have just established a set of rules, and a 
moment ago, voted a rule which denies that specific request, and I 
ask, raise the point of order that that would undertake to change our 
rules. 

Mr. Odell: Mr. Chairman, while the Committee is at leisure, 
I would like to inquire with reference to the status of Mr. Jones, Sen- 
ator Hanger and myself. We are here as the personal representa- 
tive of Senator Bailey, some one of whom of us will desire to be here 
throughout the investigation. 

* * * Mr. Odell : Pardon me just a moment, Judge, the oh- 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 237 

ject of my inquiry at this time, was whether or not our presence here 
under the rules was in violation of the rules? 

The Chairman: No, sir; I understand you have the right to be 
present. 

Mr. Robertson: I propose to make a motion that Senator Han- 
ger and Mr. Odell and Mr. Jones be granted the full and free per- 
mission of this Committee, to appear here on behalf of Senator 
Bailey, either altogether or separately, as they wish. 

Mr. McGregor : I second the motion. 

The Chairman : Gentlemen, you have heard the motion, are you 
ready for the question? 

(Cries of "Question.") 

The Chairman: If you gentlemen desire it read, it will be read. 
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye. (Ayes vote) Con- 
trary, no. (No noes) It is a unanimous vote. 

[How anxious they seemed to welcome attorneys Odell, Hanger 
and Jones to defend the Standard Oil Senator. Hanger and Odell 
have both, since the investigation, appeared as attorneys for the Wa- 
ters-Pierce Oil Company in its litigations in Texas ; Hanger's law firm 
of Capps, Cantey and Hanger, before Federal Judge Bryant, at Sher- 
man, and Odell in the main suit at Austin.] 

COCKE DENIED COUNSEL. 

Mr. Robertson: The question pending is the proposition in the 
telegram and the reply. 

The Chairman: Yes, sir; and we have sent for Mr. Wolfe. 

Mr. Robertson: I would suggest this, that the point of order 
seems to me with all due respect to the ruling of the Chair and the 
views of the Chair, to be correct. It seems to be the wish of the ma- 
jority of the Committee, four having voted for and three against it, 
that the substitute shall be adopted; that substitute denied the right of 
counsel to Mr. Cocke and it seems to me must be regarded as deny- 
ing counsel on the outside, for the House Committee on that subject, 
and I think that we ought to stand by the rule we have adopted, un- 
less we are going to repeal it, and I shall vote to sustain the theory of 
that rule myself. 

The Chairman: If there are no further remarks, I will have the 
clerk call the roll and record the vote. I believe the motion is 

Mr. McGregor: Mr. Cobbs and Mr. Wolfe are both out now. 

The Chairman: Mr. Cobbs, we are ready to take a vote. State 
your motion again. 

Mr. McGregor: The stenographer has it there. The motion is 
that the tender of services by the parties, signing the telegram, to as- 
sist Mr. Cocke in preferring the charges, be accepted, their servics be 
accepted, and they be permitted to be present. 

The Chairman : Gentlemen, you have heard the motion. 

Mr. Cobbs: I make a substitute in this form, that inasmuch as 



238 Senator J. W. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

the rules provided by this Committee do not admit of the tender, do 
not allow us to accept the offer, we therefore refuse it with thanks. 

Mr, McGregor: That is an argument, rather than a substitute. 

The Chairman : Do you offer that as a substitute? 

Mr. Cobbs: Yes, sir; we would not want the gentleman to think 
we were not grateful for the offer. 

The Chairman: The motion offered by Mr. McGregor is, that 
the tender of services on the part of the gentlemen of Dallas, in their 
telegram to me, that their services be accepted. The substitute offered 
by ISlr. Cobbs is that the rules adopted by this Committee prohibiting 
such action, that we decline their services with thanks. (Committee 
Report, p. 25.) 

PATTON WAIVERS. 

Mr. Patton: I want both sides represented, Mr. Chairman, in 
this. I don't know exactly how to vote in reference to this. I believe 
there ought to be attorneys here representing the prosecution who are 
not connected with this Committee. There are attorneys here repre- 
senting Senator Bailey who are not connected with it, and I don't 
want to place myself on record as opposing a full and fair investiga- 
tion, and both the prosecution and defense represented by outside at- 
torneys. I want to be exactly fair and just to both sides in this case, 
and then I want to hear the evidence, weigh it, and decide accord- 
ingly. / don't exactly know how to vote. I don't like to refuse the 
offer of those gentlemen, and I don't like to vote against it, but I 
thought as Senator Bailey has attorneys here on the outside to repre- 
sent him, to represent what we call the defense, I do believe that the 
prosecution ought to have attorneys on the outside to represent that 
side, and it is the only way, I believe, to give perfect satisfaction, to the 
people at large and do justice. 

Mr. Jenkins: I now offer an amendment to the motion of the 
gentlemen from Harris, the motion being, as I understand it, to accept 
the offer signed by the four attorneys, that we accept the offer as to two 
and let them decide which two. 

Mr. McGregor: I accept the amendment. 

The Chairman: I understand the question. Has any one any- 
thing to say on that proposition? 

Mr. Cobbs: I move to table the amendment. 

Mr. Patton: I second the motion. 

The Chairman: The motion now before the House, is in effect, 
that we accept the services of the four gentlemen tendering their serv- 
ices from Dallas in their wire to me. There is an amendment of- 
fered by Mr. Jenkins that we accept the services of two of these gen- 
tlemen, the two to be selected by the gentlemen tendering their serv- 
ices, and Mr. Cobbs makes the motion that you table the amendment. 
We will vote upon the motion to table. 

Mr. Jenkins: Ayes and noes. 

The Chairman: Call the roll. Those in favor of tabling the 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 239 

motion will signify by saying aye, and those opposed will say no. Re- 
member, now, we are voting upon the amendment, the motion to table 
the amendment. 

Upon call of the Committee, those voting aye were as follows: 
Patton, Cobbs, Wolfe. Those voting no were as follows: Robert- 
son, Jenkins, McGregor. 

The Chairman; How is the vote? 

Mr. McGregor: A tie. 

The Chairman: I vote aye. Now, it is upon the original mo- 
tion, now, that we accept the services of these four gentlemen. (Com- 
mittee Report, p. 24.) 

WOLFE TO THE RESCUE (?) AGAIN. 

Mr. Wolfe: Now, can I ofTer a substitute for the whole thing? 

The Chairman: I suppose it will be in order. Put it in writing. 

Mr. Wolfe: The stenographer will take it down. I make the 
motion that this Committee ask authority — authorize the Chairman 
to appear before the House and ask authority to employ counsel to 
represent the Committee in this investigation. 

The Chairman : Who selects the counsel? 

Mr. Cobbs: The Committee. 

The Chairman : Mr. Wolfe ofTers a substitute to the motion that 
this Committee appear before the House and ask authority to employ 
counsel to represent the complainant in this proceeding before this 
Committee. 

Mr. Robertson: Well, I second the motion of Mr. Wolfe. 

The Chairman: You have heard the substitute Mr. Wolfe of- 
fered for the original motion. If there are no remarks to be made 
upon it, the clerk will call the roll. 

Mr. Jenkins: I would just like to make this remark — 

The Chairman: Yes, sir. 

Mr. Jenkins : The only part of it I object to is that the Committee 
should select the counsel. I really think, if there is to be counsel, that 
those who are on the other side of the issue ought to select them. 

Mr. Cobbs: The other side? 

Mr. Jenkins: Yes; those who are pushing this prosecution, yes, 
sir, the prosecution. This Committee is not selecting counsel for one 
side, and I don't think they ought to for the other, 

Mr. Wolfe: I look at it this way — 

If we are to have counsel here, and I am not opposed to it, that that 
counsel ought to be some man who has not been identified with this 
controversy, and not known and recognized as a partisan in this mat- 
ter, but some man of high character, ability, and standing, whose very 
name will give confidence to it, give faith in his labors. 

[Why then did the Committee not select a "non partisan" lawyer 
or lawyers for Senator Bailey, instead of allowing him to select the 
most venomous of his followers, his proteges, his puppets and his 
tools?] 



240 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked/ 

Mr. Cobbs : Does that resolution provide for compensation? 

Mr. Wolfe: Yes, sir. 

Mr. Robertson: Is the counsel to be employed? is it understood 
he represents the opposition to Mr. Bailey? 

Mr. Jenkins: That he represents the charges that have been 
filed. 

Mr. Robertson : The prosecution of the charges. 

The Chairman: Or hereafter to be filed? 

Mr. Jenkins: Yes, sir. 

The Chairman : The whole charges? 

Mr. Robertson: As I understand it, this resolution does not in- 
terfere, does not contemplate interfering with Mr. Bailey and his 
counsel, but is to employ a respectable attorney to represent the pros- 
cution against Mr. Bailey. 

Mr. Wolfe: Yes, sir; and is not to interfere with the right of 
any member of this Committee to ask any questions that any member 
wants to ask. 

The Chairman: Yes, sir. 

Mr. Cobbs: I suggest, though, that you put a disinterested and 
non-partisan laioyer, and fix the compensation for him. 

Mr. Robertson: The employment, of course, would fix that, 
wouldn't it? 

The Chairman: Yes, sir; I think if the Legislature leaves it with 
us about the employment. 

Mr. Robertson: We necessarily would have the right to pro- 
vide for his payment. 

The Chairman: Yes, sir; do you all understand? 

Mr. Cobbs: Mr. Chairman, I have been in favor of that kind of 
a motion all the time. (Committee Report p. 26). 

The Chairman : Gentlemen, the clerk will call the roll now, and 
all in favor of the substitute, offered, I believe, by Mr. Cobbs. * * * 

The Chairman: All in favor of the substitute, when the roll is 
called, will answer aye, and opposed no. The clerk will call the roll. 

Upon call of the roll those voting aye were as follows: Robert- 
son, Patton, Cobbs, Wolfe. Those voting no were as follows: Jen- 
kins, McGregor. 

The Chairman : Well, gentlemen, I suppose about the next busi- 
ness we can do before we proceed orderly now is to make arrange- 
ments about employing this counsel, and if there is no objection I will 
appoint Mr. Cobbs and Mr. Robertson to go before the House for 
this commission. * * * 

The Chairman: The motion is carried, and now I will appoint 
Mr. Cobbs and Mr. Robertson to go before the House and ask for 
this permission that the rule, as adooted, provides for. 

Monday, Jan. 21, 1907, 2 p. m. 
Present: Cobbs and McGregor. 

Mr. Cobbs: Let's consider that there is no Committee, and ad- 
journ until O'Neal calls us back and finish things down yonder. 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 241 

By "down yonder" Cobbs referred to the fight that was going on 
on the floor of the House over the proposition of the Baileyites, as 
submitted to the House by the Committee just appointed, looking to 
the employment of counsel on behalf of the Committee, and to the 
exclusion of counsel agreeable to the proponent of the charges. Let 
us therefore leave the Committee room and go "down yonder" where 
the fight between those who would ascertain the facts concerning 
Bailey's conduct, and the truth of the charges pending, and those who 
would suppress that truth, is in progress. 

COBBS OFFERS RESOLUTION TO EMPLOY COUNSEL. 

Cobbs, of Bexar, and Robertson, of Travis, having been appointed 
by the Chairman O'Neal for that purpose, proceeded from the Com- 
mittee room on the third floor of the capital to the hall of the House 
of Representatives, on the second floor. House Journal, page 169 
discloses the following proceedings. 

Mr. Cobbs at this juncture of the proceedings (by unanimous con- 
sent), on behalf of the Investigating Committee, Mr. Duncan yield- 
ing the floor, offered the following resolution: 

Resolved, That the committee appointed to investigate any charges 
that may be preferred before it against Senator Bailey shall have, and 
is hereby given full power to employ and arrange to compensate a 
competent lawyer to represent the committee and the House of Repre- 
sentatives in the investigation of any charges that may be made against 
Senator Bailey and to assist the committee in the development of the 
truth relating thereto. 

(Signed) Robertson, of Travis, 
Cobbs. 

The resolution was read, second time. 

Question: Shall the resolution be adopted? 

Mr. McGregor ofifered the following substitute for the resolution : 

Whereas, Messrs. Crawford, Etheridge, Crane, Cockrell and 
Porter, reputable lawyers of Dallas county, have tendered their serv- 
ices to the Chairman of the Investigating Committee to develop the 
charges preferred against Senator Bailey without charge to the State: 
be it 

Resolved, That said committee are instructed to permit said law- 
yers, or any two of them, to appear before said committee and partic- 
ipate in any investigation before such committee. 

Mr. Cobbs raised a point of order on consideration of tlie substi- 
tute, stating that it icas not germane to the resolution it proposes to be 
substituted for. 

The Speaker held the point of order not well taken, stating that 
as a matter of order the substitute is germane. 

Pending consideration of the substitute, Mr. Wolfe, yielding 
the floor, on motion of Mr. Gaffnrd, the House at i :io p. m. took re- 
cess to 2 :3o p. m. to-day. 



242 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

PENDING BUSINESS. 

The House resumed consideration of the pending business, same 
being the resolution by Mr. Cobbs, with substitute therefor by Mr. 
McGregor pending. 

Question: Shall the substitute be adopted? 

Mr. McGregor withdrew the substitute whereupon Mr. Duncan 
offered the following substitute for the resolution by Mr. Cobbs: 

Resolved, That the party or parties preferring charges against 
Senator Bailey and filing same with the Investigating Committee, 
shall be entitled to appear before the committee by counsel of his own 
selection and by person and fully examine all witnesses and in all 
things represent the person filing charges as fully as if before a court 
of law; provided, such counsel shall serve without any expense to the 
State. 

(Signed) DuNCAN, 
Smith. 

Mr. Duncan moved the previous question on the resolution, and 
the motion was seconded. 

Mr. Cobbs then withdrew the resolution from further considera- 
tion of the House. 

Mr. Jenkins raised a point of order on the withdrawal of the reso- 
lution, stating that the resolution is the property of the House and 
should not be withdrawn without consent of the House. 

The Speaker overruled the point of order. 

Mr. Jenkins appealed from the ruling of the Chair. 

The Speaker, waiving a second, called Mr. Robertson of Bell to 
the chair pending the appeal. 

The Chair then stated the question: Shall the House sustain the 
ruling of the Speaker? 

The ruling of the Speaker was sustained. 

Speaker Love resumed the chair. 

Mr. Duncan then asked unanimous consent of the House to offer 
as a resolution the substitute just offered by him for the Cobbs reso- 
lution. 

Mr. Wolfe objected. (House Journal p. 170). 

It will be noted from the above that Cobbs seeing that the House 
would likely adopt the Duncan Substitute, itnmediately retreated and 
withdrew his motion. Failing to ^et what he wanted from the House, 
he preferred to go back to the Committee where they had a safe major- 
ity on every proposition, however unreasonable. 

COCKE PLEADS FOR COUNSEL. 

During the discussion in the House on the Cobbs Motion, em- 
powering the Committee to employ counsel, the proponent of the 
charges, as a member of the House, took part in the argument and 
said: "This House has voted unanimously for an honest, fair, im- 
partial investigation, and has invited some one of its members or some 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 243 

citizen of the State, as a prerequisite to such an investigation, to pre- 
sent and file charges in the premises. I have thought it my duty un- 
der the circumstances to prepare some charges — not in malice, not 
as an enemy, but doing what I conceived to be a plain duty that I owe 
to my people under my official oath. I have written nothing, gentle- 
men, that I do not believe to be true; I have written nothing I did not 
know personally, or through reputable citizens, or through data — " 
Mr. McConnell here interposed an objection that the remarks 
were out of order, but when Mr. Cocke protested, and the Speaker said 
he was unable to tell whether or not the remarks would be in order. 

POSITION IS CRITICAL. 

Continuing Mr. Cocke said: "I am only prefacing my remarks. 
I don't wish to say one word that is improper. I know that the po- 
sition of this House is critical. I know that my own attitude is crit- 
ical. Whatever conclusions I have reached away from this hall, I 
shall throw away from me, and shall not utter one word here save 
what is judicial and proper and fair. / do not know what hasoccurred 
in the Committee. I have heard that they will not admit the person 
presenting these charges. That may be wrong. I think the per- 
son propounding the charges should be permitted to be present and 
given the opportunity to ask questions, or to have them asked through 
some one else. As I understand the situation now, the most I can do 
is to appear and ask some questions through members of the commit- 
tee. I am not allowed to open my lips. On the other side, Mr. Bai- 
ley is allowed to select his own attorneys, and that is right. What 
gentleman of this House would be so unkind or unfair as to want to 
select Mr. Bailey's attorneys for him in this matter? But this situa- 
tion assumes circumstances similar to asking a District Attorney to fer- 
ret out the facts and formulate the indictment and present it and then 
tell him that he would have no right to be present, but if he is let in at 
all, he must tell another lawyer selected by a majority of the commit- 
tee, which may or may not be friendly to one side or the other, to ask 
his questions. What chance would I have to unbosom myself and tell 
the facts to Mr. Bailey's partisans, if such should be the case? I have 
assumed the obligation you have laid upon some one and I should be 
permitted at least to select those gentlemen who have olfered their 
services to the State for nothing. It is due them to say that I have 
never met one of them except that I possibly met one of them in a 
casual way, and I am not sure but that it may have been his brother 
that I met. I don't know them personally, but they are satisfactory 
to the party who filed the charges." — {Dallas News, January 22, 
1907.) 

SUPPRESSION COMMITTEE RECONVENES. 

At 5 p. m., on the same day as above, the Committee reconvened 
and the following proceedings were had: 

The Chairman : What is the wish of the Committee? 



244 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

Air. Jenkins: It seems to me it would be in order to have a re- 
port from the Committee. 

The Chairman : Is the Committee we sent to the House ready to 
report? 

Mr. Robertson: Proceed, Mr. Cobbs. 

Mr. Cobbs: fVhat is that story about ^oin^ up the hill? 
{Laughter) We ask for further time. 

The Chairman: Do I hear any motion to extend further time to 
the Committee. 

Mr. McGregor: I wish to frame a motion in accordance. 

Mr. Cobbs: While I have not had time to talk with the Judge 
and with the balance, I understand the Senate has full power to em- 
ploy counsel and to make the investigation, and I understand from 
our rules we have full power, as far as that is concerned. JVe can get 
together and discuss thai. 

The Chairman: I think the attorney for the Senate would have 
a right to ask any other questions when we got through, anyhow. 

Mr. Jenkins : // occurs to me that when a committee is appointed 
it ought to report. 

Mr. Robertson: They got up a big wrangle in the House about 
it. It seems to me that this Committee, with its power and its wisdom, 
or with the power and in the wisdom of its Chairman, can conduct this 
examination — I mean, can control it, it matters not who may conduct 
it — with that decorum and order and within the lines of propriety that 
a court could, and I cannot see any objection to Mr. Cocke, who has 
made these complaints here having — selecting him an attorney, if he 
wants to and can furnish one without cost to the State — I can't see 
any objection to letting the lawyer come here, and holding the lawyer 
within proper bounds. 

The Chairman: Won't it be necessary to amend our rules? 

Mr. Robertson: I think so, yes, sir. Let's agree upon some 
amendment and get rid of all this foolishness and get down to business. 
What do you say? 

Mr. Cobbs : Well, now, we will have to get off where we can jaw 
at each other. [Cobbs was afraid the public might hear what he had 
to say and he wanted to "jaw" privately.] (Committee Report p. 28). 

Mr. McGregor: Well, you are already together; just stay to- 
gether. 

Mr. Robertson : If Cocke wants to furnish a lawyer, what objec- 
tion is there? 

The Chairman: He can't come in under the resolution already 
passed, but you would have to amend the rules. The only trouble 
there has ever been about it before has been about bringing one in, and 
there was bad feeling between them and Bailey. [They were very 
tender about Bailey's feelings.] 

COBBS PARTIALLY CAPITULATES. 

Mr. Jenkins: That don't cut any figure. We see that every day 
in court. We can govern the decorum of this proceeding. 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 245 

The Chairman: Oh, yes, sir; I don't doubt that; but I don't want 
to have to. 

Mr. Jenkins: Well, I hardly anticipate anything like that. 

The Chairman : Well, of course, whatever course the Committee 
takes, I will be satisfied with it. 

Mr. Cobbs: I am inclined to this idea; that Mr. Cocke has a 
right to come before you and interrogate the witnesses. I am rather 
inclined to think that privilege may be given to him, except in so far 
as Senator Bailey is himself concerned. There, I do not think it 
would be proper, because their personal relations are such that it 
would be disagreeable. We might confer with him — pass this by 
and see if he wants to interrogate other witnesses himself, and as to 
Senator Bailey, why, allow him to secure an attorney who is not ob- 
jectionable, and who is of high character, to interrogate him; but if 
he wants the right to examine other witnesses, to name the ones he 
wants to examine. I suggest that we request him to name the witnesses 
that he wants to examine himself, the testimony he wants to develop 
himself, and we reserve the right to act upon it — see what he wants 
exactly. [Remember that Mr. Cocke had never yet been permitted 
to appear before the Committee, and there was no "bad blood" be- 
tween him and Bailey, so far as he knew.] 

Mr. McGregor: You mean, Judge, to give him an attorney 
throughout the proceedings? 

Mr. Cobbs: No, sir; I understand from the letter from him I 
read today — 

Mr. McGregor: I understand, but I wanted your idea. I 
thought I was in position to accede to it. 

Mr. Cobbs: My idea was to give him the right to examine the 
witnesses he brings here, except Senator Bailey. 

Mr. McGregor: Don't you think we had better confine him? 
he will protract the examination. Why not give him an attorney to 
conduct his examination, and when he signifies a desire to interrogate 
a witness, have the Chairman pass on it at that time, as to whether we 
will indulge him that right or not. 

Mr. Wolfe: I would like to say a word right here on that point. 
In the letter Mr. Cocke said: "These charges are filed subject to 
withdrawal by me unless the Committee will consent to my being 
present and freely propounding any pertinent questions desired to be 
asked by me." Now, when he handed these charges to the Chairman 
the Chairman accepted them, but told him that he would not con- 
sider them filed with that sort of a string tied to them; the Chairman 
took them and kept them, but did not consider them filed. On yes- 
terday morning Mr. Cocke came to the Chairman in the hall down 
below and in my presence stated to him that he had filed them, and 
substantially that he waived that provision, as I understood him to say, 
of his letter. Now, I was informed a few minutes since bv the Chair- 
man that Mr. Cocke has been to him and stated to him that the Chair- 
man and I misunderstood him; and therefore it would appear that the 



246 St'iuitor J. II'. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

charges are really filed subject to the condition stated. Isn't that 
correct, Mr. Chairman? 

The Chairman: Yes, sir, that was the conversation which oc- 
curred. 

Mr. Wolfe: Just a few minutes since. Now, in our actions this 
morning we did not so understand. I certainly understood Mr. Cocke 
yesterday that he withdrew that condition. 

The Chairman: He did, most positively; there is no question 
about it. 

Mr. Cobbs: Well, you heard his speech down there? 

The Chairman: Yes, sir. 

Mr. Wolfe: Now, today, he reiterates that he demands that be- 
fore these charges are filed for action by the committee that the right 
which he demands in this letter, which is printed here and from which 
I have read, be given to him. (Committee Report p. 29). 

COMMITTEE REPORT STILL DALLIES. 

Mr. Jenkins: Mr. Chairman, I thought we were calling for a 
report from the committee we appointed to go down and ask them to 
allow us to employ a lawyer. I wish to know whether the House 
granted it or refused it. 

Mr. Robertson: Don't you know? 

Mr. Jenkins: Not officially. I was there, but from what I could 
see, the House neither granted nor refused it. The gentlemen, from 
some cause or other, without instructions from the Committee, with- 
drew the motion they had been instrutced to offer. 

Mr. Cobbs: For peace. 

Mr. Jenkins: And I don't know whether the House will refuse 
or whether they will grant it ; they have never had a chance to say, and 
we now have a resolution on our minutes instructing these gentlemen 
to get the sense of the House on that, and if they have not, I want to 
know why. 

The Chairman: We might have some further reports from the 
committee, so as to get rid of that motion. 

Mr. Robertson : Well, I will state, as far as I know about it, Mr. 
Cobbs and myself presented the matter to the House, embodying what 
we understood to be the wish of the committee, and they discussed it 
until I got tired of the matter and I went over into the Senate to see 
Senator Glasscock, not thinking that the discussion would be closed 
before I got back — it looked like they had taken hold of it for a week 
— but when I got back I understood the motion had been withdrawn. 
That's all I know about it. Brother Cobbs, what do you know about it? 

COBBS CONFESSES AND RECEIVES HIS DISCHARGE. 

Mr. Cobbs : When I got over there, the first thing was one of the 
members of the Committee undertook to instruct us another way from 
what had been stated and somebody else sent up a substitute for it and 
got it in there, and it looked like they would get to the end of the dis- 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 247 

cussion, so I withdrew it, inasmuch as the committee had all the power 
necessary, and I could not see my friend anywhere, and I concluded 
the best thing for me to do was to cut off debate and come back where 
we had ample powers and I withdrew the resolution. It can be pre- 
sented again at some future time by Judge Robertson. 

Mr. Robertson : Suppose we ask to be relieved? 

The Chairman: If there is no objection, the committee will be 
discharged. 

Mr. Wolfe : Mr. Chairman- 
Mr. Jenkins: A point of order. The resolution is before the 
House, and I ask the Chair to appoint another Committee which will 
get the sense of the House on it. 

The Chairman : I will do so on motion properly before the Com- 
mittee. 

Mr. Jenkins: I move that the Chair appoint a committee of two 
to get the sense of the House on the resolution we have made. 

Mr. McGregor: I second the motion. 

Mr. IVolfe: I move that the Committee be discharged. 

The Chairman: The Committee is already discharged. It is now 
for the appointment of another one to get up another row in the 
House, I suppose — I don't know what the effect of the resolution 
will be. Has anyone got anything to say? All in favor of it say "aye;" 
all opposed, "No." The "Noes" seem to have it and the motion is 
lost. (Committee Report p. 29.) 

THE WOLFE AGAIN IN EVIDENCE. 

Mr. Wolfe: Now, Mr. Chairman, I move an amendment to 
the rules. * * * No, sir; no, you know this morning we pro- 
vided that Mr. Cocke should be permitted to be present. * * * 
The amendment which I offer to the rules is this, if you think it is 
sufficiently definite: I want to add, "and shall be permitted to inter- 
rogate the witnesses who shall testify before the Committee." 

Mr. Jenkins: How is that? 

Mr. Wolfe: That he should be permitted to interrogate wit- 
nesses who were called to testify before the Committee. 

Mr. Cobbs: On charges made by him? 

Mr. Wolfe: Yes, sir; on charges made by him. 

The Chairman: Now, does that include Senator Bailey? 

Mr. Wolfe: Yes, sir. 

Mr. Cobbs: Include him? 

Mr. Wolfe: Yes, sir. [How terrible it appeared to Cobbs that 
they should think of an amendment to allow Cocke to interrogate 
Baileyl] 

ROBERTSON RECONSIDERS. 

Mr. Robertson: I will offer this amendment to the amendment 
offered by Judge Wolfe. If you want this thing to have every ap- 
pearance of fairness — not only the appearance of it, but to be ac- 

1—18 



248 Soiator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

tually fair — now, we passed a resolution that Mr. Bailey may have 
before this Committee three attorneys of his own selection. If there 
are not two sides to this question, then we have no question here. If 
there are two sides, both sides of it ought to be represented, and any- 
thing short of that will subject the whole thing and the Committee 
and everybody else to criticism, such as neither party to the contro- 
versy, nor any member of the Committee wants or desires, I am sure. 
I believe that Mr. Cocke ought to be allowed by the Committee, if 
he desires to do so, to provide himself an attorney, who shall co- 
operate with him in this matter, without expense to the State. I be- 
lieve that is fair, and I believe that anything short of that ivill not 
be regarded as fair by t/ie public. I don't care whom he employs. 

The Chairman: You ofifer that amendment? 

Mr. Robertson: Yes, sir; I don't care whom he employs. If 
he employs anybody who is obnoxious, this Committee has power to 
hold him in line and make him deport himself as a lawyer should in 
the court house. I don't know anything about whom Cocke wants; 
I have had no consultation with him; I have never talked to him 
about his charges, or anything that he does want — I don't know any- 
thing about it, but I believe that is fair, and I believe anything short 
of that is not. 

Mr. Wolfe: Mr. Chairman- 
Mr. Robertson: I think Mr. Wolfe will accept that amend- 
ment. 

Mr. Cobbs: Mr. Cockrell, Attorney General Crane, Ethe- 
ridge and Mr. Porter, I believe, signed a telegram — and Crawford 
— offering their services. Now, as we don't want all of them here, 
and we only need one of them, for my part I am willing right now 
to allow him to designate Mr. Joseph Cockrell to represent him, in 
connection with the remarks made by Judge Robertson. 

Mr. Jenkins: Mr. Chairman, I don't tliinJi we oitgfit to dictate 
to him wJiom he should designate. If he is entitled to an attorney, 
he is entitled to an attorney of his own choice. Mr. Cockrell may be 
that man and he may not. 

Mr. Cobbs: I don't offer it as a dictation at all. 

Mr. Jenkins: I want to know by what pretense of fairness we 
would even pretend to suggest whom he should employ. If he pre- 
sents a man here that is unworthy of the dignity of this Committee, 
we know how to protect ourselves, and, if he does not, that's the 
end of it. Now, I am in favor of his having, not only one, but two — 
the other side has three — and that he shall designate them. We will 
protect ourselves if he don't bring worthy men. I believe that is 
fair, and I believe the House would have voted for that resolution 
that was offered as a substitute. That was the substance of it, and 
after the previous question had been ordered it was withdrawn, with- 
out any authority of the Committee, so far as I know. 

Mr. Cobbs: Why didn't you object, then? 

Mr. Jenkins: I didn't want to make myself prominent in the 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 249 

matter. I want to say this: I have never attended a caucus since I 
have been here; I have taken no part in it, and I didn't want to be a 
member of this Committee; I don't want to be put in the attitude 
of a partisan, because I have never attended a caucus of the anti- 
Bailey forces, but in all fairness I will go to the extent of offering 
that resolution in the House, if this Committee will not concede to 
me what appears to be so fair. If the House don't give it, that's all 
right. 

THE WOLFE HOWLED BUT THE COCKE IS ADMITTED, — CONDITIONALLY? 

Mr. Wolfe: Mr. Chairman, here is what I want to say: I 
don't understand that Mr. Cocke has ever asked the Committee to ap- 
pear here as counsel. I do not concede that he has any right to ap- 
pear here as counsel, or employ counsel to appear here to represent 
him. As I said this morning, this is not a case of Cocke against 
Bailey, and I don't think he has got any such right. This Commit- 
tee might grant him the privilege, that is true, but so far as I know, 
Mr. Cocke has never made any such request. He has filed certain 
charges here — he has filed them on condition; he said: "Unless you 
comply with this condition I will withdraw those charges." Now, 
what are the conditions? He says, "These charges are filed subject 
to withdrawal by me unless the Committee will consent to my being 
present and freely propounding any pertinent question desired to 
be asked by me. ]\Iy only reason for asking to be present and permis- 
sion to interrogate the witnesses lies in the fact that the charges are 
grave and I do not care to assume the responsibility without having 
an opportunity of developing the facts. Neither is it practicable 
for me to submit a list of questions to be propounded by other gentle- 
men." Now, he seems to want to do it himself. Now, my motion is 
not only to let him be present and ask questions, but to gratify what 
seems to be his healtfelt desire of coming before the Committee and 
freely interrogating each witness put on the stand. Now, if we are 
going to do what he wants, why should we do something that he has 
not asked? 

The Chairman: Well, gentlemen, the motion before the House 
now is that the Honorable Mr. Cocke be permitted to interrogate 
all witnesses during the course of this investigation. 

Mr. McGregor: Judge Robertson amended that. 

The Chairman: Judge Robertson offered an argument. 

Mr. Robertson: I will amend it now, that Mr. Cocke be au- 
thorized now to attend the sessions of the Committee in person, ac- 
companied by such attorney as he may select, who shall have the 
privilege of examining the witnesses on the charges, provided the 
attorney he selects brings no expense, or incurs no expense by reason 
of the employment. 

Mr. Jenkins: I second the motion. 

Mr. Robertson: And that he shall file with the Committee the 
name of the attorney that he selects to conduct his examination. 



250 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

Mr. McGregor: Subject to ilie approval of the Committee. 

Mr. Robertson: Yes, sir; subject to the approval of the Com- 
mittee. 

The Chairman: Now, the motion of Mr. Wolfe is that Mr. 
Cocke be permitted to attend the meetings of this committee and to 
examine all witnesses that testify. The amendment ofifered by Mr. 
Robertson is that he not only be allowed to attend the meetings and 
propound questions, but he also be permitted to employ counsel at 
his own expense or without e.xpense to the State, who shall have the 
same privilege. 

Mr. Patton : Mr. Chairman, does that mean — 

The Chairman: And that the name of the attorney so selected, 
that he shall file the name with the Committee, that we may know 
who he is. 

Mr. Cobbs: Before he comes? 

The Chairman: Yes, sir; before he comes. 

Mr. Patton: That is in reference to all charges preferred by 
him? 

The Chairman: Yes, sir; are the gentlemen ready for the ques- 
tion? 

Mr. Cobbs: The question. 

The Chairman: The clerk will call the roll. All in favor of 
the amendment of Mr. Bobertson will signify it by saying "Aye" 
and the contrary, "No." Call the roll. 

The clerk called the roll as follows: 

Aye— Robertson, Patton, Jenkins, McGregor. 

No— Cobbs. 

The Chairman: Now, I suppose it will be necessary to appoint 
some member to notify Mr. Cocke that the resolution is passed. 

Mr. McGregor: Mr. Chairman, put the motion as amended. 

The Chairman: Yes, sir. All those in favor of it as amended, 
signify it by saying "aye." 

The motion as amended was adopted by unanimous vote. 

Mr. Robertson: I move that Mr. McGregor be appointed to 
break the news to Mr. Cocke. 

Mr. Cobbs: I suggest that the Chairman have the clerk write 
him a letter. 

Mr. AIcGregor: Yes, sir; I don't want to talk much to him. 
(Committee Report p. 32). 

[Even Mr. McGregor seemed afraid of "The Cocke of the 
Chaparral," although Senator Bailey said he was only a "young 
idiot."] 

COBBS QUIESCENT, YET SOLICITOUS — FOR BAILEY. 

Mr. Chairman: Mr. Clerk, when you draw up that motion, 
submit it to some of the gentlemen of the Committee to pass on it. 
Submit it to Judge Robertson and Mr. Wolfe, and if they say it is 
correct, Mr. McGregor may deliver it. 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 251 

Mr. Cobbs: Mr. Chairman, I want to say informally, so that 
Mr. McGregor when he delivers that letter can tender to Mr. 
Cocke — 

Mr. McGregor: If you are going to send anything from tliis 
body, put it in waiting. I don't want to say anything to him. 

Air. Cobbs: Well, he will hear of it. So far as I am concerned, 
any attorney that Mr. Cocke selects, I trust if I am to vote on it, that 
he will be a nonpartisan, somebody who has not been a partisan in 
this matter. Now, I am willing to take Mr. Cockrell; I know him, 
and I am willing to take him. I don't want to draw any invidious 
distinctions between them, but I merely make these suggestions. / 
don't want them in the record, but simply want him to know what 
action I will take when he goes to select him. 

Mr. McGregor: Mr. President, when I consented to deliver 
that written communication, I did it on the theory that it would be 
official; that's the only purpose of it, and I will continue to do it on 
that theory, and that's the only communication I am authorized to 
take to him. If they want to talk to him by personal suggestions, it 
will have to be done by somebody else than me. If there is anything 
further than that, I will decline to have anything to do with it. 
(Committee Report p. 33). 

Austin, Texas, Jan. 21, 1907. 
Hon. JVilliam A. Cocke, Austin, Texas: 

Dear Sir: This will notify you that at a meeting of the Special 
Committee appointed to investigate the charges preferred by you 
against the Hon. Joseph W. Bailey the rules of this Committee 
were so amended as to permit you to appear in person and by one 
counsel of your own selection for the purpose of interrogating such 
witnesses as may testify before this Committee. This amendment 
to the rules was made with the understanding that you should, be- 
fore its next meeting, furnish to the Committee the name of the 
counsel so selected by you, in order that the employment by you 
might be approved by the Committee, which employment must be 
made without expense to the State. 

Yours respectfully, 

(Signed) H. A. O'Neal, 

Chairman. 

The foregoing letter, having been submitted to and approved 
by Messrs. Robertson and Wolfe, and having been signed by the 
Chairman, was delivered by Mr. McGregor to Mr. Cocke. (Com- 
mittee Report p. 34). 



252 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

MR. COCKE REPLIES. 

January 21, 1907. 
Re Senatorial Investigation. 

Judge H. A. O'Neal, Chairman, House Investigating Committee, 

Austin, Texas. 

Dear Sir: I have the honor to acknowledge your favor of even 
date advising me that your Committee has amended its rules as fol- 
lows: "As to permit you to appear in person and by one counsel of 
your own selection for the purpose of interrogating such witnesses 
as may testify before the Committee." You qualify this by adding 
that the employment of counsel by me must be approved by the Com- 
mittee. Of course, I shall be pleased to select a reputable lawyer 
and I trust that no differences shall arise on this account. As you say, 
however, that the employment must be without expense to the State, 
it naturally follows that I must look to such of the gentlemen from 
Dallas as have offered their services to the people, or any others that 
might chance to do so. Then, too, the gentlemen offering their serv- 
ices from Dallas would like to alternate with each other as the mat- 
ter progresses from stage to stage so as not to work such a great hard- 
ship on any of them. For the immediate present, however, Judge 
J. E. Cockrell has consented to remain, but cannot do so longer than 
a few days. I suppose that either of the five gentlemen from Dallas 
who wired you yesterday will be acceptable to your Committee, as 
I am able to avail the people of Texas of their services. 

Respectfully yours, 

(Signed) Wm. A. CoCKE. 

COCKE CREEPS CAUTIOUSLY FORWARD. 

The above quoted letter occasioned another long wrangle, re- 
sulting, finally, in the Committee excluding Colonel Wm. L. Craw- 
ford, and Hon. F. M. Etheridge as being persona non grata to his 
royal highness — the innocent and injured Senator. 

During the course of this wrangle, which was the first meeting 
of the committee the proponent of the charges had been permitted to 
attend, Mr. Cocke said: 

Mr. Cocke: Mr. Chairman, will I be permitted to make any 
remarks? 

The Chairman : Yes, sir; / will hear you. 

Mr. Cocke: I just want to say. Gentlemen of the Committee, 
that I am extremely anxious to select only such gentlemen as would 
be agreeable to the Committee. I believe it is due the Committee 
and to myself that I say that the reason for submitting the list is that 
one of the gentlemen is sick, another one has important pending liti- 
gation, another one wants to go home, another one does not know 
just when he can come, but between the five they have assured me 
that they will be glad to have one of them present all the while. I 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 253 

believe the Committee will recognize the reasonableness of the situ- 
ation, and if there is any one of the gentlemen that is objectionable, 
it occurs to me that it is due to me for the Committee to say so now, 
in order that I may try to make other arrangements, if those arrange- 
ments are not satisfactory. 

* * * If I had to call those gentlemen singly — call upon 
them singly, it would be embarrasing to them not to know whether 
they would be acceptable. If I had to call on them later, I don't 
know whether your Committee would be willing to have their services. 

On Wednesday morning, January 23rd, the day that Bailey was 
declared Senator by the joint action of the House and Senate, the 
Committee met and resolved "that said Cocke be allowed in person 
and through Judge Poindexter, employed by and representing the 
Senate Committee, to fully examine any and all witnesses who may 
be called to testify." Why, then, did they afterwards refuse to re- 
quire the witness Bailey to submit to an examination by either the 
proponent of the charges or by his counsel? 

BAILEY REFUSES TO BE SEARCHED. 

The Committees met on the afternoon of January 24, 1907. Inas- 
much as Judge Joseph E. Cockrell was compelled to return to Dallas 
that night. General M. M. Crane appeared for the proponent of the 
charges, and after advising the Committee that neither himself nor 
Judge Cockrell could be present at all times during the investigation, 
requested that in such case the proponent of the charges be per- 
mitted to secure other counsel. To this Mr. Odell, on behalf of 
Bailey, strenuously objected in several vehement speeches to the Com- 
mittee. In reply General Crane said, in part 

Mr. Crane: * * * If he is not guilty of the things with 
which he is charged, why, I suppose the evidence will develop it. 
If he is guilty of the things with which he is charged, I suppose that 
even his friends would not undertake to condone it. Now, as to 
whether Mr. Bailey shall be subjected to this examination, that is a 
matter that the Committee can control at all times, but I want to say 
this, gentlemen, that is the first time — I will say this to you in all 
candor — // is the first time that I ever knew any man charged with 
any offense to be investigated before any court to undertnfie to dic- 
tate who his prosecutors sliall be. I have been practicing law nearly 
thirty years in Texas, and I never knew a man charged with any 
crime to send his attorneys into court or permit them to go into court 
protesting against the appointment or permission by the court of a 
lawyer to appear in the prosecution of the case. The court has ab- 
solute control of it and can prevent any improper practices, and I 
hope they will not insist on that proposition, because it is so unusual. 
If our questions asked Mr. Bailey are improper, the Committee and 
Chairman can control us. We understand that we arc under the 
jurisdiction of the Committee, just like under a judge on the bench, 
and the Committee can require us to respect them. Now, I do not 



254 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

think these objections are at all tenable, and I do insist on the privi- 
lege that Mr. Cocke can choose his counsel, and if we want relief, get 
some other gentlemen. They can change as many times as they wish ; 
we have no objection. 

Mr. Cocke: I feel like saying to the Committee that I do not 
want any attorney to humiliate or embarrass Senator Bailey, and I 
have no such intention. This Committeee must appreciate the del- 
icacy of my position, asking me to go into the trial of a case and not 
knowing who my attorneys shall be throughout. I would be per- 
fectly willing for General Crane and Judge Cockrell to stay here — 
I would be delighted if they could. (Committee Report pp. 54, 
56). 

BAILEY CALLED BUT FOUND WANTING. 

After refusing this request the following proceedings were had: 

Mr. Crane: I will state here, we have arranged the order of 
the presentation of our testimony and will call Senator Bailey first, 
and we will be very much obliged to the Committee for necessary 
process, if he will not come without process. We wanted to begin 
that way. U'e have mapped out our ivork on that line and will first 
examine him, and then introduce the rest of it. 

The Chairman: That is a question for the Committee. Gentle- 
men, you have heard the suggestion of General Crane. What will 
you do about it? 

Mr. Odell: I will state to the Committee, on behalf of Senator 
Bailey, at any time this Committee desires his presence here there is 
no necessity for the issuance of process. However, it may save some 
time. IVe desire to enter protest against the calling of Senator Bailey 
as a witness at this time. 

Mr. Crane: Now, Mr. Chairman and Gentlemen of the Com- 
mittee the charges, the campaign charges, as I understand it, are en-, 
tirely out of this, the charges and counter-charges that may have 
been made. The only question before the Committee is the charges 
on file here in this paper. We have been permitted to appear here, 
charged with the burden of developing the facts, to see whether they 
sustain those charges or not, and we think, as a matter of good faith 
to us, as we have to discharge that burden, that this Committee ought 
to permit us to do it just like all the courts do — call our witnesses in 
the ordinary way. And it is unusual for opposing counsel, or even 
for the court, to indicate to counsel what witnesses they shall call, 
because that is a matter that seems to me ought to be left to the dis- 
cretion of the counsel and I never heard it questioned, that I recall, 
before. We want to call Mr. Bailey to see what the facts are — that's 
all. 

Mr. McGregor: I would like to suggest that our rules provide 
that the rules governing district courts shall obtain. 

The Chairman: I understand that that is the rule. 

Mr. McGregor: That being so, I think they can offer their 
proof in any way they choose. 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 255 

The Chairman: Gentlemen, are you all ready for me to make 
the ruling on the matter? If anyone desires to be heard, I would be 
glad to hear from him. 

Mr. Odell: It is true, Mr. Chairman, that the rules of this 
Committee provide that the hearing and investigation shall proceed 
under the rules of the district court of this State — of course, in so far 
as they can he applicable. It follows as a matter of course that the 
rules prescribed for the district courts of this State furnish no guide 
for the guidance of this Committee on a question of this kind. As a 
matter of course, counsel ordinarily have the right in any case to call 
the witnesses in the order in which they desire to introduce them — 
that is true. It is true both in a civil case, and it is true in a criminal 
case. However, a man, if he was charged with an assault and bat- 
tery in this State, if he was charged with a disturbance of the peace, 
could not be called in a justice court and put upon the witness stand 
with no question or issue of moral turpitude afYecting him, and there 
is no reason why an issue of this kind should not be met squarely. It 
cannot be said, it seems to us, that this hearing and investigation has 
any close relationship to a civil suit. This is not a case here of Cocke 
against Bailey. The man who filed these charges can have at the 
hands of this Committee no kind of relief. The accusations here 
against Senator Bailey not only involve moral turpitude, but there 
are many of these charges that in their nature are criminal accusa- 
tions brought against him. Now, there is no necessity here for us 
undertaking to disguise, especially before this Committee, the real 
facts as they are presented here. It has been contended by many of 
Senator Bailey's accusers that they were ready at any rasonable time 
to proceed with the proof of his perfidy and moral turpitude. If 
they have the proof, certainly as a matter of course, they ought to be 
required to introduce that proof. If they have no proof of these 
charges, they ought to say so. Now, to bring Senator Bailey here at 
this time, what attitude are they in? They bring the man whom they 
are accusing here. They seek to interrogate him with reference to 
these charges, and give every witness by whom they expect, if they 
do expect, to be able to prove that, the notice of what Senator Bailey 
himself has to say about that. I repeat here, Mr. Chairman, that 
many of these charges, of themselves, are criminal in their nature. 
The burden of the proof is on these gentlemen. If they don't have 
the proof of the charges, the charges ought never to have been pre- 
sented here. If they have the proof of the charges, it ought .to be 
tendered here, and then Senator Bailey, in his own good time, under 
the rules prescribed by this Committee, be permitted to refute the 
charges, and that, Mr. Chairman, is all that we ask. 

* * * It would do Senator Bailey a most grievous injustice 
to bring him here at this time and undertake to interrogate htm on 
these criminal and quasi-criminal accusations that they made against 
him. I repeat, the most trivial misdemeanor that can be charged 
against a man in this country, in any court of this country, that no 



256 Senator J. W. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

such procedure as that would or could be permitted. And in these 
charges here, Mr. Chairman, they must amount to high crimes, to 
treason as well as misdemeanors, and yet these gentlemen are now, 
after all the preparation they have had and after months have gone 
by since those charges have been made, at the very inception of the 
investigation that the Legislature of this State has ordered, are un- 
dertaking to call the accused here, instead of fairly furnishing the 
accused with the testimony and the evidence that he has against him, 
to the end that he may meet his accusers. 

Mr. Crane: Mr. Chairman and Gentlemen of the Committee, 
I had not believed that that question could possibly arise. This is not 
a criminal proceeding, but, as I understand it, it is a proceeding that 
was finally determined upon by the friends of Mr. Bailey in the 
House, as well as by those who were classified as his enemies. If I 
am mistaken about that — but I understand that the resolutions 
adopted by this Committee — under which this Committee was or- 
ganized, were agreed to by his friends. If I am mistaken about 
that, I would that some gentleman would correct me. Now, that 
being true, they sought to guard Mr. Bailey's interests by requiring 
specific charges to be prepared. I am offering no criticisms now at 
all, but Mr. Cocke complied with that legislative regulation, and 
filed the specific charges, and now when we intended, as Mr. Cocke's 
counsel, to develop the proof of those charges, they undertake to di- 
rect us in the order we shall introduce it and what witnesses we shall 
call. Now, I am paying them a higher compliment than they are 
paying their client. I am assuming, if Mr. Bailey is innocent, that 
his testimony ivill show it, and I want to get him now on the stand 
for the purpose of examining him and seeing what the facts are from 
his standpoint. Then, if we have anything else that is contradictory 
— it may be that his testimony is satisfactory or unsatisfactory; but 
we have the right to know what he will have to say about it. If at 
any time we ask a question the answer to which might incriminate 
him — and that is what counsel are arguing as one of the reasons why 
we are not permitted to follow it — they can protect him, he can pro- 
tect himself at the proper time. But certainly, that is no reason, 
because we might ask him some question of that character — that 
is no reason why we may not bring him on the witness stand 
and ask him what was thought perfectly legitimate. It seems to me 
just like any other civil case. Bring him here and examine him, and 
if at any time any question arises of this character then the question 
can be made. Now, if Mr. Odell's position is correct, we would have 
no right to call Mr. Bailey now or any other time. (Committee Re- 
port, pp. 58, 59.) 

Mr. Odell : We will have Mr. Bailey at the right time. 

Mr. Crane: Yes, sir; but we want him ourselves at the right 
time, and we don't want them to say when we shall take him. Now, 
I submit that when a public servant is being investigated under a 
legislative resolution that there ought to be the utmost frankness 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 257 

and candor, and he ought to put himself at their disposal — at our dis- 
posal — because we want to know what the facts are. 

Mr. Hanger: Do you want to examine or cross-examine? 

Mr. Crane: Sir? 

Mr. Hanger: You will have the right to cross-examine him — is 
that what you mean? [As a matter of fact this promise was finally 
broken.] 

Mr. Crane: I want the right to examine him, and you can call 
it examination or cross-examination. But the point is, they are 
hedging. They will produce Mr. Bailey. We want, if the Com- 
mittee pleases, to produce him ourselves, and we submit that for the 
Legislature to pass a resolution saying that the great Commonwealth 
of this State has the right to investigate Mr. Bailey's conduct on 
specific charges that are filed, and then to deny those people the right 
to call Mr. Bailey and ask him about that, their public servant, we 
undertake to say that that is a ruling that is remarkable. And I 
don't mean to suggest to counsel what they ought to do, but I would 
regard them as unfriendly to me if I were in Mr. Bailey's attitude. 
I would want to be brought and put on the witness stand and interro- 
gated about all the facts, every one of them, and I think that the 
Committee ought to require it at our request. Now, I am assum- 
ing that, what we will do if he is innocent, as these gentlemen say he 
is. I have made no charges against him, but Mr. Cocke has, es- 
teeming it his duty so to do. Let us see what are the facts as to those 
charges, and let us ask Mr. Bailey about them. (Committee Re- 
port p. 59). 

* * * Mr. Crane: Well, now, as we have to conduct the 
examination, did you ever hear a court say to a counsel, except it 
be to get the evidence, that you have no right to call this witness at 
this time? When will the right time be? How will we know? 
We think the right time is now, and I submit to this Committee of 
lawyers, are we, as lawyers, permitted under the rules of the dis- 
trict court — and you have adopted them — are we, as lawyers, per- 
mitted to have the privileges of the district court to call our wit- 
nesses in our own time and in our own way, or will opposing coun- 
sel and the Committee dictate to us as to how we shall call them? 
That is the point, that is all. So far as I am concerned, I would treat 
Senator Bailey just as I would the lowest negro if produced here. 
I don't recognize any difference in high citizens. Every man is 
equal before the law, and a United States Senator is entitled to no 
more consideration than I am or you are, or anybody else. When 
the Legislature passes a resolution requiring us to examine into the 
acts of a United States Senator, and when they say that he is ready 
to meet his accusers face to face, and when we ask him to meet us, 
and we ask to inquire of him about the very matters in dispute, then, 
I object, we are not to be told that we cannot call him. 

Mr. Crane * * * Now, then, I would like for the Commit- 
tee to determine now whether or not the district court rules are to ap- 



258 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

ply and whether or not we are to have the liberty that counsel 
usually have from the justice court on up, of calling our witnesses 
in our own time and in our own way. 

Mr. Cobbs: I don't think it is a question of whether the district 
court rules apply. 

Mr. Crane: I understand you had them adopted. 

Mr. Cobbs: I understand. There is no question about the 
rules. 

Mr. Cobbs * * * You and I have differences between us. 
We will have to let the Committee decide it. 

Mr. Odell: I rise at this time for this reason, and no other, not 
specially that I be enlightened, that I may be enabled to enlighten 
the Committee in what I shall say, but these proceedings here are 
for the whole world, they are to be published, and while I do not 
say that General Crane is intentionally doing so we again have been 
placed here in a false position with reference to our attitude. It 
is suggested by him that we are in the attitude of claiming here that 
if they ask Senator Bailey with reference to certain charges pend- 
ing against him that it would be necessary for him to rely on his con- 
stitutional rights not to incriminate himself. That is not true. 

Mr. Crane: Didn't you state that? Your whole thought was 
in that direction. (Committee Report p. 60). 

COLONEL JENKINS IS ASTONISHED AT ODELL'S PROPOSITION. 

Mr. Jenkins: I suppose I may as well he heard before the rul- 
ing as afterward. I have listened with interest and with astonish- 
ment at the proposition advanced by Senator Odell. We have 
adopted the rules, as has been said, of procedure in civil cases in the 
district court. Now, what are those rules? It is said here that be- 
cause some of these charges involve moral turpitude or crime, that, 
therefore, you can not call the witness. I do not believe that any 
lawyer could afTord to stand before any district judge upon the trial 
of any civil case and say that the plaintiff could not call the defen- 
dant because the suit involved moral turpitude and crime. If you 
are suing a man for damages for murdering the husband of a 
woman, it would be no objection to calling him as a witness for the 
plaintiff because he was charged with murder. If he had not been 
tried he might object to answering any question which would tend 
to inculpate him. If he had been tried and acquitted, as was the 
case in a case that I had for trial, and his testimony was deemed ben- 
eficial in part to the plaintifT, the plaintiff could call him and put 
him on the stand and prove his case, and I undertake to say that there 
is no rule in this State that prevents the calling of the defendant by 
the plaintiff and putting him under oath as a witness. * * * The 
well-known parliamentary rule is that in matters of inquiry you 
should be more liberal, both as to pleadings and evidence, than in 
matters of impeachment or matters involving cr-minal consequences. 
These gentlemen are not asking anything more liberal than they 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 259 

would have in the district court — that is, to make out their case if 
they can, or to prove any isolated fact, if they can, by the defendant 
in the case. It is astonishing to me that it would be objected to. 

* * * We will get to an issue if Senator Bailey is put on the 
stand. If he admits certain things, that is an end of it. We do not 
need any witnesses. If he denies it, let them prove it, if they can, 
let them fail if they cannot. 

Judge Poindexter: Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the Com- 
mittees, I have been somewhat embarrassed in ascertaining for my- 
self the lines of duty that I am to pursue, and I have taken the re- 
sponsibility of deciding it for myself. Employed by the Senate 
Committee and recognized by the House Committee, I have de- 
cided and concluded that my purpose here was to assist in develop- 
ing the truth as it might exist with reference to these charges. 

* * * This is an inquest here. It is a body sitting here, created 
by the two departments of the Legislature, to ascertain the truth 
with reference to certain charges that have been made in print, and 
subsequently here reduced to writing, against a public official, and 
I have not reached the conclusion that this is a criminal investiga- 
tion. There may be in some of these additional charges — I have 
not read them — there may be something there that might, if estab- 
lished, result in a criminal prosecution. I do not know. I have 
not examined them. But that question would arise when the ques- 
tion was propounded to the witness on the stand, and then the Com- 
mittee, without the witness himself, or his counsel objecting, might 
interpose an objection to the question being asked. But we are here 
seeking for the truth, and it has occurred to me, and I had agreed 
on this proposition suggested, that time would perhaps be saved by 
calling Senator Bailey and propounding such questions as counsel 
might see proper to propound to him, and such as the Committee 
might think proper questions, that that might save time. There 
might be many things that he would not deny, but simply explain. 
As has been suggested here, that would avoid a vast field of investi- 
gation and save a great deal of time, and at the same time violate 
no principle that ought to control and actuate the Committees in 
the development of the evidence and the facts in this matter. I can 
see nothing that should authorize or empower the Committee, or any 
member of it, to dictate to counsel the course they should take in 
procuring their evidence. This is certainly not a criminal pros- 
ecution. If it is, we have no right to put him on the stand. We 
have absolutely no right to put him on the stand at any time. If 
it is not, we have a right to put him on at any time. (Committee 
Report p. 62). 

MR. WOLFE'S ANXIETY INCREASES. 

Mr. Wolfe: * * * Noiv, the question that comes to my 
mind is, ought we to compel Senator Bailey to go first upon the wit- 
ness stand and testify, subject himself to cross-examination, while the 



260 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

witnesses are on the outside — the evidence to be published and every- 
thing to be seen, and then to come here and contradict him on the 
witness stand? That is not usual in such a class of cases of this, and, 
it being more in the nature of a criminal charge than in the nature of 
a civil suit, I think counsel for Senator Bailey have a perfect right 
here, at this time, to interpose the objection that the complainant 
should proceed with his evidence in whatever order he desires to 
make out his charges, and after he has produced evidence on anj 
one of these charges, then it will be incumbent upon Senator Bailey 
to come in here and disprove it if he is able to do so. Now, I will 
state that this is not a court wherein Senator Bailey is bound to come 
and prove himself innocent, but the House has required that some 
man make charges, specific charges. Now, that carries with it the 
idea that the man who makes the charges is supposed to introduce 
proof to sustain those charges, and that Senator Bailey in the minds 
of this Committee shall remain innocent until after evidence is in- 
troduced here to a certain degree tending to establish his guilt. I do 
not think that we ought to start in here with the assumption that Sen- 
ator Bailey is guilty, or that it is incumbent upon Senator Bailey to 
prove himself innocent, but that those who have filed the charges 
and are prosecuting the charges have the burden of establishing his 
guilt, Znd not by bringing Senator Bailey here and putting him on 
the witness stand and expecting to get his confession. For that 
reason I certainly feel that in the commonest justice Senator Bailey 
is entitled to hear the witnesses that the complainant has to sustain 
these charges before he is required to open his mouth here at all. 

Mr. Crane: There is one thing that. Gentlemen of the Commit- 
tee, opposing our ofifer of the testimony of Senator Bailey seem to 
me to utterly forget, and that is that Senator Bailey insists that a 
great many of his acts which we can prove by him are not improper 
for a man in his position. Now, with that view of it I fail to under- 
stand why any friend of Mr. Bailey should object to our putting 
him on the stand and proving those, and, of course, incidentally, 
other things that he does know. Now, for instance, Mr. Bailey has 
asserted the right, as I understand him, and I am assuming that I 
correctly understood him, that he has a right to accept employment, 
all of the employment that he has accepted. Now, we don't want 
to put campaign speeches in evidence before this Commitee, but 
we want to get Mr. Bailey here and ask him just such questions as 
would develop the particular points that I understand he has stated 
in his campaign. It will be a whole lot easier than it will be to ex- 
amine forty witnesses who heard him make a speech. Now, gentle- 
men know — all of you gentlemen know — how difficult it is. He 
made a speech down here yesterday, I understand, and if I were a 
gambler I would bet a hundred dollars right now that I could take 
twenty men out of the House and there would not be any five of them 
who would agree on the same statement. Now, I think it is absurd 
to require us to prove his statements that way, with all due respect to 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 261 

these gentlemen, when we ask to bring him here and make inquir- 
ies of him about matters that he will not dispute, as we understand 
it. Then that will shorten the procedure. And why can't we? 
* * * This is the inquiry of an investigating committee to see 
what the facts art and then see whether there will be any future pro- 
ceedings of any kind. Now, I regret these delays. We wanted to 
bring Mr. Bailey here and examine him about statements he has 
made heretofore in public and get what the facts are about them, and 
not by the necessity of going out and getting men who heard him 
make speeches, as suggested by Mr. Wolfe, and then putting in con- 
tradictory statements. It is a civil proceedings, entirely so, and 
ought to be so held. Now, if you gentlemen are going to determine 
it is a criminal procedure, it means that we can not call him at all. 
Now, it is one or the other. It is either a civil or criminal proce- 
dure. If it is a criminal proceeding, tell us so now, and then we 
will know that so far as we are concerned it will be left to his course 
and the course of his counsel as to whether he goes on the witness 
stand or not, because the Committee can not compel him to, and 
ought not. If you tell us it is a criminal proceeding, while I shall 
disagree from you, on the other hand I will say that if you decide it 
is a criminal proceeding, then you ought not to allow us to put him 
on the stand, either now or at any other time. But let me ask you, 
as a matter of fairness, if it is a civil proceeding, why not accord to us 
the common privilege that is never denied a reputable lawyer to 
ofifer his testimony in his own way, in his own order, so long as he 
pledges his professional word that he is going to make a connection 
between any testimony he is offering and the other that he proposes 
to ofifer. Now, that's the way it looks to me, and I am trying to look 
at it as calmly as possible. We want to examine Mr. Bailey about 
many things that I am sure he will not dispute, unless we have mis- 
understood him and have misread what he has uttered. And then 
we may examine him about other things he has not discussed at all, 
but that is a question that will arise when the time comes. 

COBBS SHIELDS THE ACCUSED. 

Mr. Cobbs: Mr. Chairman, I want to make a few remarks. I 
am not like my friend, Mr. Jenkins, surprised, as he stated he was, 
at Mr. Odell. * * * I never heard of anybody calling the de- 
fendant on the witness stand to make out the plaintifif's case. That 
is an unusual procedure. It may be done. You may institute suit 
against a party and put him on the witness stand and make out a case, 
but I say it is not hardly the practice I have been accustomed to. 

Mr. Crane : Wouldn't we have the right to do that if we wanted 
to? 

Mr. Cobbs: You ought not to have brought your suit, then. 
* * * Now, the party charged here is Mr. Bailev. Now, you 
propose to make the party charged your witness. There is not a 
scintilla of evidence tending to show it is a civil cause of action in 



262 Senator J. II'. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

which there is any specific relief sought. None could be sought. 
But you have charged him here with all character of crime in his 
position as United States Senator that would be so disgusting to the 
sense of propriety as to demand of the House of Representatives that 
his credentials should be taken from him. * * * Now, then, 
you bring your civil action, and set up a state of facts like that, which 
would set aside the judgment. You can examine the opposite party, 
if you wanted to do that, but I say this is nothing like a civil proceed- 
ings. In my mind it is not a quasi-criminal proceeding. It is an 
investigation that goes to a man's honor and his integrity. It goes 
to his purity, and it goes to no other fact. [If Bailey was "pure" and 
"innocent" why all this refusal to make him testify?] (Committee 
Report p. 65). 

Mr. Crane: We are simply investigating his conduct as a Sen- 
ator. 

Mr. Cobbs: You are investigating his conduct as a Senator. 
Now, what interest has any individual got in that? It is the interest 
that the State has; it is the House of Representatives investigating 
this transaction, not Mr. Cocke, not you gentlemen. 

Mr. Crane: But you required Mr. Cocke — that is, required 
some individual — 

Mr. Cobbs: Nobody required Mr. Cocke — 

Mr. Crane: But don't the rules require some individual to file 
those charges? 

Mr. Cobbs: No, sir; they do not require them filed. 

Mr. Crane: But does not the Investigating Committee make it 
a prequisite to any investigation that charges be filed? 

Mr. Cobbs: Yes. 

Mr. Crane: Then, don't you think that individual, if he files his 
charges, ought to be permitted to prove them by any legal testimony? 

Mr. Cobbs: I should say the privilege is conferred upon any 
individual to make charges against Senator Bailey who desired to do 
so, under this resolution. 

Mr. Crane: Now, we want the privilege of making the proof. 

Mr. Cobbs: Yes; but you want a good deal more. You want 
a good deal more than a mere investigation. 

Mr. Jenkins: If you should sue a man for damages for murder, 
couldn't you put him on the stand? 

Mr. Cobbs: That would still be a civil transaction in which in- 
dividuals are interested, and I have tried to make that clear, that in 
a matter in which there is a civil contract, in which you have a right 
of action against a party, a right of damages, is wholly unlike an in- 
vestigation set about under a serious resolution of the House of Rep- 
resentatives. 

Mr. Cockrell : You do not doubt the authority of this Com- 
mittee at some session. 

Mr. Cobbs: I do not doubt the authority of this Committee at 
all, but I doubt the propriety of the Comtnittee putting any man in 
the position that you want to put Mr. Bailey in. 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 263 

Mr. Cockrell: You do not mean to say that this Committee 
would go back and make a report without having called Senator 
Bailey, do you, if no other witness was offered here? 

Mr. Cobbs: I say we would call him if no charges were made 
here. 

Mr. Cockrell: That you would call Senator Bailey? 

Mr. Cobbs: I say we would call him if no charges were made 
here. 

Mr. Cockrell: That you would call Senator Bailey? 

Mr. Cobbs: Certainly. 

Mr. Cockrell: I say, suppose there were no charges made, and 
no man appeared here to prosecute them, do you think there is a man 
on the Committee that would go back and make a report without 
first having called Senator Bailey and investigating the truth? 

Mr. Cobbs: I do not believe there is a man on this Committee 
that would go and report without first calling him. 

Mr. Cockrell: Now, that brings it down to simply a question 
of the selection of counsel. 

Mr. Cobbs: Of letting you undertake it. 

Mr. Cockrell: Wouldn't the Committee interrogate him if you 
put him on? 

Mr. Cobbs: Yes, sir; but we would do it in a very different way 
from you. 

Mr. Cockrell: How do you know they would? 

Mr. Cobbs: Because we have been charged here with the duty 
of doing this thing independently. 

Mr. Cockrell : But I do not like your assumption that you would 
do it differently from us. How do you know that? 

Mr. Cobbs: I judge you by your acts. You are asking here 
now to bring Senator Bailey here and interrogate him first. If there 
were no charges filed this Committee, so far as I am concerned, 
would bring him here, or with any charges that anybody was to 
make, and then we would interrogate him with reference to it. That 
would be my idea about it; but my idea would be to exhaust all 
other sources before we would ever call upon him here to convict 
himself. That certainly would not be giving to him the presump- 
tion of innocence. 

Mr. Cocke: Are you assuming that he is guilty? 

Mr. Cobbs: No, sir; on the contrary, my assumption is that he 
is free from guilt. Any other assumption would be unworthy of 
the Committee, as the question is unworthy of you to ask me what 
our assumption would be in reference to that. 

Mr. Crane: If your Committee have the right to call Mr. Bai- 
ley without the introduction of any previous testimony on the part 
of anybody else, why are we not accorded the privilege of calling 
Mr. Bailey in advance of any other testimony, when we intend to 
follow it up with other testimony? If your Committee have the 
privilege, and would exercise it, why may we not do so? 



264 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

Mr. Cobbs: For the simple reason that you have preferred 
charges against him here, preferred serious charges against him. 
You are in the relation of prosecuting those charges yourself, and 
force upon us the position of judges. We would be that, anyhow; 
but you take the burden yourself of prosecuting him. 

Mr. Crane: Suppose none of us appeared here? 

Mr. Cobbs: I am supposing a fact. Don't let us take a case 
that does not exist. 

Mr. Crane: But I am taking a supposition you made yourself. 
Suppose that we were not here? 

Mr. Cobbs: Then the investigation would proceed anyway. 

Mr. Crane: You would take the burden of asking questions? 

Mr. Cobbs: Certainly. I would face the difficulty whenever 
the difficulty arises; but that is not the case. You are prosecuting 
here. You have preferred charges against him. You represent 
them, and you, as his attorneys here, ought to stand up and inves- 
tigate those charges. Now, you come and ask that Senator Bailey 
be put up there first. (Committee Report p. 66). 

Mr. Odell: * * * Now, we have many serious objections, 
some of them that it is not necessary to state, to Senator Bailey's ap- 
pearing at this time. We want these men who charge him with all 
of these nefarious and criminal practices to come here and testify. 
If Senator Bailey is put on first, these men who have been libeling 
and slandering him may never make their appearince in this Cap- 
itol. That is one of the reasons. 

Mr. Cocke: Mr. Chairman, if no member of the Committee 
desires to say anything I would like to say a few words. 

Mr. Chairman: Very well. 

Mr. Cocke: I shall endeavor to suppress any sentiment of an- 
imus which might naturally be expected to be instilled into my feel- 
ings by the strong remarks of counsel. I have said before and I re- 
peat it now, that I am striving to perform what I conceive to be a 
citizen's duty and the duty of a legislator under the circumstances, 
and I think it is due me, Mr. Chairman, that this Committee know 
in advance that not one word in these charges was written by me ex- 
cept I had good reason or reason sufficient to my mind to justify 
them, and shall insist as this proceeding advances — at least, I shall 
earnestly request — that I be permitted to either ofifer proof in an 
orderly, lawyer-like way as applicable to such an inquiry as this, or 
else be permitted to ofifer this Committee from time to time the rea- 
sons that animated me in the presentation of these charges. / have 
not at this moment the slightest malice in my heart towards the dis- 
tinguished gentleman. I have nothing in my heart except a desire to 
perform a duty, and I ask in making these charges that I be 
extended the privilege of interrogating the public servant who him- 
self claims to be innocent. I am willing to admit for the time being 
he is innocent, yet I assume that I would have the right to interro- 
gate that man, as we would have the right to interrogate the defen- 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 265 

dant in civil proceedings as to the truth or falsity of the allegations, 
and if perchance any part of the allegations could be supported by 
his own testimony, that I should have the privilege of such exam- 
ination. Throughout the legislative proceedings leading up to this 
investigation, gentlemen, I think, we are entitled to assume that Mr. 
Bailey and Mr. Bailey's friends were sincere and honest in their 
protestations of his willingness to submit to a thorough and searching 
investigation upon there being propounded specific and written 
charges. I assume, gentlemen, that other members of the House 
of Representatives will offer a more generous attitude towards the 
distinguished man than has been forced upon me in the propounding 
of these charges, for we assumed in good faith, that we should not 
charge a man in his high station with these specific acts and pub- 
lish to the world even the suspicion of their existence in any more 
emphatic form than was absolutely essential for the protection and 
honor of the State. // was Mr. Bailey and Mr. Bailey's friends 
who stated that we must have specific written charges, and it was he 
who, in the House of Representatives, said, "I am willing and ready 
to face any man who will make them." I desire not to continue this 
argument, gentlemen, or to express any unbecoming sentiment or 
animus that should not characterize one in a judicial proceedings, 
but it seems to me unfair to the member of the Legislature who has 
faithfully sought to comply with an invitation that he should not 
be permitted to question a high public servant of their truth or fal- 
sity — if the charges be false. 

Mr. Cockrell: Mr. Chairman, just a word, not with the 
thought of adding anything to what has been said. It is disagree- 
able to us — I don't know whether the counsel on the other side in- 
tend to make it so— to have it repeatedly thrown up every time they 
get up to address the Committee on any question, that it is the per- 
sonal enemies of Senator Bailey who are hounding him here. / 
believe there are higher motives that sometimes actuate citizens of 
this State than matters of personal enmity. Senator Bailey never 
did me even a discourteous act in his life. Even after some little 
political differences, which had never rankled in my heart for a 
moment, I have had occasion to defend him, and to do it lately — that 
is, this summer— against aspersions of those who, I thought, were 
actuated by improper motives, and I defended him in private con- 
versation. I never had occasion to become his spokesman in public 
against an imputation of his honesty, on the ground that he occu- 
pied a position before the people of Texas so exalted, from my 
standpoint, that he could not be, through any consideration of 
money, disloyal to the interests of the people of Texas. Now, con- 
ceding, however, that we are actuated by the meanest of motives, 
which,' of course, I disclaim, will a more thorough examination and 
a more thorough investigation be reached by those of us who are an- 
imated — who are prompted by such motives than an investigation 
conducted by the partisan friends of the gentleman? I understand 



266 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

that they came before this Committee a few days ago, and asked 
the privilege or tendered their services as we had to investigate the 
charges. Would an investigation under the direction of these gen- 
tlemen have been as fair or more fair to the people of Texas than 
an investigation in which we participate? Now, coming down to 
the point immediately in question. Admit that we had no counsel 
here; admit that Mr. Cocke had not been permitted to ask questions 
in support of these charges, at some stage of the proceedings it 
would have been the duty of the Committee to call Mr. Bailey and 
examine him, and examine him thoroughly, with reference to these 
charges. That being true, you waive the question of its being a 
criminal prosecution, because the Committee would no more have 
a right to examine him, if the charge is a criminal one, than would 
counsel, who now seek the opportunity of examining him. Of 
course, we are not going to take the position that he has not the right 
to decline to answer any question, should he choose, that would tend 
to criminate himself. Now, it is only upon that position that he 
has a right to decline. There is no difference between us upon that 
proposition. Now, it resolves itself into a question of discretion 
upon the part of counsel, it seems to me, as to the order in which 
they will proceed. The Committee are in thorough agreement with 
us that at some stage of this proceeding this Committee will examine 
Mr. Bailey unless somebody else examines him. You don't mean 
to say, if that be true, that you would close the proceedings, so far 
as the prosecution of the charges is concerned, and leave it to the 
gentlemen on the other side to say whether thev would reopen it 
and ask to put him on the stand when nothing had been urged 
against him? The position of even the committeemen who oppose 
our putting him on is that it would be the duty of the Committee be- 
fore closing the investigation to put him on the stand. Now, Mr. 
Cocke has counsel here, who are undertaking to assist him. You 
have accorded him a courtesy in allowing him counsel, which I 
think was according him an absolute right, when it was accorded as 
a courtesy. Now, that being true, why ought we not be allowed to 
proceed in the manner which we think will most expedite the trial 
and which we think will most fairly develop the facts? We shall 
not urge and I don't think Senator Bailey will for one moment at 
any stage of the proceeding, and I don't understand, gentlemen, to 
take the position, that he will ever refuse to answer upon the consti- 
tutional ground, and yet that is the only ground. 

Mr. Odell: Excuse me. That was brought in by your co- 
counsel. 

Mr. Cockrell: On the ground that they would criminate him? 

Mr. Crane: * * * Now, there are many things that we 
will expect to prove by Mr. Bailey, very many of them, and I don't 
know whether Mr. Cocke will have other evidence on that or not. 
I did not have the status of counsel until yesterday, and did not 
undertake to go into the question of evidence. That was not my 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 267 

province at that time. I have since gone over with Mr. Cocke some 
of the proof he expects to ofifer here. We can expedite matters 
very much. You admit you have to examine him at some time, and 
it is just a question of procedure as to when you will put him on. 
* * * I believe that fairness and justice require that we be per- 
mitted to put Senator Bailey on and question him with reference to 
every matter that we desire to question him on, every proper matter, 
in a proper way, and that we be permitted to do so at our own time 
and in such a way as counsel think is most proper and most bene- 
ficial to the investigation, and I don't see any use indulging in any 
question as to whether it is a civil or criminal case. All we want is 
the truth. (Committee Report p. 70). 

BAILEY ESCAPES EXAMINATION. 

Mr. Cocke: Mr. Chairman, pardon me for a minute. 

The Chairman: * * * i win state furthermore that I don't 
think it is proper for Mr. Cocke, with counsel present, to be heard 
at all. * * * / ^ill hold at this time the gentlemen represent- 
ing the complainant do not have the right to introduce Senator 
Bailey. 

Mr. Crane: We desire to take the vote of the Committee on 
the proposition. 

The Chairman: The Clerk will call the roll, and those favoring 
the ruling of the Chair will vote "Aye" and those against the rul- 
ing of the Chair will vote "No," as the roll is called. The Clerk 
will call the roll. 

The Clerk called the roll, and those voting "Aye" were: Patton, 
Cobbs and Wolfe — 3. Those voting "No" were: Robertson, Mc- 
Gregor, and Jenkins — 3. 

Mr. Cobbs: That refuses to overrule your ruling. 

The Chairman: Yes, sir; I take it so. (Committee Report p. 
72). 

GENERAL CRANE VAINLY PROTESTS. 

Mr. Crane: Counsel for Mr. Cocke object to the ruling of the 
majority of the committee, for the reason — no, in denying them the 
privilege of introducing Senator Bailey now, for the reason that it 
denies them the right of conducting their case in their own way with 
a view of supporting the charges made by Mr. Cocke. Second, be- 
cause it requires us in advance to produce witnesses from various 
parts of the State to prove facts which will be readily admitted by 
Mr. Bailey on the witness stand, he only denying the inferences 
which are drawn therefrom. Third, or whatever it is, that in a 
matter of this sort, and as counsel for the Senator insist, that involves 
his honor, the rules of evidence ought to be liberalized rather than 
contracted with a view of giving to the Legislature and through the 
Legislature the people of the State, whose servant the Senator is, all 
of the facts, whether deduced from the Senator or from other wit- 



268 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

nesses, to the end that if he is innocent of the facts, may show same, 
and if he is not innocent they have a right to know it. For these 
reasons we protest against the ruling of the Committee, in a legisla- 
tive investigation into the conduct of a public officer and for which 
ruling it is believed that no precedent can be found. We also pro- 
test against the refusal to permit Mr. Cocke to make any sugestions 
to the Committee, for the reason that he may have some lawyers pres- 
ent, he himself being a lawyer, and filing the charges upon which he 
seeks to produce proof and upon which he desires the Committee to 
understand not only what he is doing but his motives for so doing. 

Mr. Wolfe: I want to say Mr. Chairman, that this Committee 
has not refused — 

Mr. Crane: I beg your pardon. The Chairman cut him off 
and would not let him speak. 

Mr. Wolfe: Well, it was not the Committee that did it. 

Mr. Crane: Well, make it the Chairman. I am glad you made 
that suggestion. I believe the Committee did not rule on that. 

Mr. Wolfe: You didn't ask the Committee to rule on that. 

Mr. Crane: Well, we will do it yet, because we think he has 
a right to do it. 

Mr. Crane: Now, as to further proceedings, I believe we 
would not want to take them up in the absence of the Chairman, but 
when he comes in, I ask respectfully of the Committee again to see 
that Mr. Cocke's right may be fixed, and then we will have some 
other suggestions to make. We want some time for consultation as 
to our procedure, because we have mapped out our procedure on 
that line. 

The Chairman: Are you gentlemen ready to proceed with the 
witnesses? 

Mr. Crane: We would like to have the ruling defined a little 
further before we decide on our procedure, and that can not be done 
in the absence of the Chairman. He seems to concede the right, if I 
understand the ruling, for us at some time or other, to examine Sen- 
ator Bailey. Now, if we can be controlled in a right of this kind in 
one particular, why a majority of the Committee could control us in 
every step we undertook to take, and I am not sure just what service 
we might be to the Committee unless we were allowed to map our 
own plans of procedure for examination and carry them out, and 
I do not know to just what extent the ruling of the Chairman goes. 
If he says after we introduce a witness, we may put Senator Bailey 
on the stand, or after we introduce a document of some kind or other 
we may put him on, and that is liable at a time when we think — 

I asked if it was the desire of the Committee to await the return 
of the Chair, to ascertain Mr. Cocke's attitude before the Committee 
— well, we will consult in the meantime and save all the time pos- 
sible. 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 269 

COMMITTEE AGAIN EVADES MAKING BAILEY TESTIFY. 

Mr. Crane: I would like for the Committee to indicate to us 
— they concede at some time we will have the right to examine Mr. 
Bailey — we would like to know about when. Now, for instance, we 
can ofifer these documents as soon as we can get them from the At- 
torney General's office, that have been the subject of so much dis- 
cussion — we can ofifer some little evidence in reference to them — then 
we can shorten the proceedings by — 

The Chairman: Do you desire a subpoena for Senator Bailey? 

Mr. Crane: Yes, sir; we do. 

Mr. Cockrell: We don't want it if counsel says he will come. 

Mr. Odell: You need not subpoena him. 

Mr. Crane: That is very good, but the point I want to know 
is, when can we use him? 

Mr. Cobbs: My understanding is when the prosecution has 
made out its charges. 

Mr. Crane: Mr. Cobbs, I want to suggest to you, if it does not 
occur to you, it is the most unreasonable rule ever promulgated 
among English-speaking people that in an investigation of this kind 
we cannot introduce Senator Bailey. 

The Chairman: There is nothing before the Committee. (Com- 
mittee Report p. 77). 

COMMITTEE HEDGES AGAINST NEW TESTIMONY. 

On January 26th, Wolfe, as a member of the Investigation Com- 
mittee, which by this time had developed into a careful suppression 
rather than an investigation, so far as the majority of the Committee 
was concerned, in order to hamper the proponent of the charges, 
moved the adoption of the following resolution : : 

"Therefore, be it resolved. That hereafter no subpoena shall is- 
sue for any witness until after the party applying therefor shall state 
in writing and under oath the point of the charge upon which said 
witness is expected to testify, and that he has good reason to believe 
and does believe that the witness will testify to facts either tending 
to sustain or disprove such charge." (Committee Report p. 148). 

The purpose of this resolution was to deny the proponent of the 
charges an opportunity to get new testimony or the testimony of dis- 
tant witnesses, with whom he had no opportunity to converse, conse- 
quently was unable to make oath as what the witnesses in turn would 
swear to. 

TESTIMONY, BY DEPOSITION, EXCLUDED AT BAILEY'S DICTATION. 

Although the Investigation Resolution provided for the taking 
of depositions, when the proponent of the charges undertook to se- 
cure evidence in that way Bailey and his lawyers blocked the road, 
as is conclusively shown by the following proceedings of the Com- 
mittee. (Committee Report, p. 170). 



270 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

Mr. Cockrell: The resolution provides for the taking of depo- 
sitions, and we have in mind to take some depositions, and we would 
like for the committee to formulate the regulations under which they 
are to be taken. 

The Chairman: It is not necessary to formulate a plan. If we 
have got a right to take depositions, we will take them under the 
rules of the district court. 

Mr. Hanger: If any testimony is to be taken away from here, 
we shall insist on it not being taken by deposition, but in the presence 
of this committee as provided by this resolution. 

The Chairman: I will state to Judge Cockrell if you have got 
any witnesses whose testimony you believe to be material, we will 
send two members of this committee at any time, send them on any 
day you say you are ready to take their testimony. 

Senator Bailey: I hope you won't start them on any day. I 
want to be present whenever any man swears touching my character. 

The Chairman : We will have to suspend this investigation while 
that is being done. 

Senator Bailey: Well, I am entitled to be present whenever 
any man is swearing against my character or reputation, and I will 
go to any part of the United States in order to be present when that 
is done. 

Mr. Odell: I make this suggestion: That the prosecution in 
this case might give us a list of the witnesses beyond the borders of 
the State that they expect to use, and the substance of what they ex- 
pect to prove by them. If they will furnish that to us we will do 
anything within our power to facilitate and hasten the securing of 
that testimony in a proper way. 

On a previous occasion the Chairman of the Committee asked 
the proponent of the charges to prepare certain interrogatories to be 
propounded to distant and unavailable witnesses, but refused to al- 
low him stenographic assistance to prepare such interrogatories. 
Later the above quoted proceedings finally disposed of this question. 
It will be noted that Senator Bailey said above: "I will go to any 
part of the United States in order to be present when that is done," 
that is when a sub-committee should be sent to procure testimony, 
but later on in the proceedings, when it was proposed to send a sub- 
committee North, Bailey and his lawyers objected. Of course, their 
objection was sustained. 

LOONEY OBJECTS TO INTRODUCTION OF VOUCHERS AND DOCUMENTS. 

Senator Looney: In the first place, I doubt whether these vouch- 
ers have ever been offered in evidence. 

Mr. Crane: That is what I am doing now. 

Senator Looney: I presume we are conducting this case along 
the lines of procedure in district courts. I wish to raise the objection 
that there is nothing in that batch of evidence that is admissable here 
except the letter Senator Bailey wrote requesting a remittance of 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 271 

$1,750, and the note for $8,000, which bears his signature. Every- 
thing else is purely hearsay, and so far as he is concerned I do not 
think a letter of that kind ought io get into this record. 

Mr. Cobbs: I want to make the specific objection to the intro- 
duction of these papers in evidence at this time, and I do it, it seems 
to me, from a sense of propriety and proper conception of the effect 
that testimony might have in the future in the absence of any testi- 
mony which would connect Senator Bailey with these vouchers at 
all. 

Mr. Chairman: I will admit the testimony now. 

Mr. Cobbs: I want to file a protest. 

The Chairman: I want to call attention to a letter that I have 
received from Mr. Cocke: 

COCKE WRITES COMMITTEE. 

"January 30, 1907. 

"Investigating Committee, House of Representatives, Austin, Tex. 

"Gentlemen: I have been informed by trustworthy citizens 
living in Western and Northwestern Texas, of the names of certain 
reliable gentlemen who heard Cal Suggs speak during his lifetime 
of his relations with Mr. Bailey, which would throw much light 
upon several of the supplemental charges, and I desire to know 
whether or not your Committee will admit their testimony in the 
event it is offered. The purpose of this inquiry is not to summon 
these witnesses unless the statements of Mr. Suggs to them are to be 
admitted." (Committee Report p. 31c). 

There are a number of very reputable citizens of San Angelo 
who would have testified as to a number of conversations with Cal 
Suggs, wherein he spoke freely of having employed Bailey on a num- 
ber of occasions to represent the firm of Suggs Brothers, of which 
he was managing head, before U. S. governmental departments, in 
consideration of "loans," and that the notes given by Bailey to them 
were mere subterfuges and were never paid or intended to be paid. 

The Committee excluded this proffered secondary evidence on the 
ground of it being hearsay, notwithstanding which another Bailey 
witness, A. T. Cole, (Committee Report p. 600) was afterwards per- 
mitted to testify as to what Bailey had told him about something that 
Hon. D. A. McFall had said during his lifetime. 

BAILEY witnesses GIVE HEARSAY TESTIMONY. 

When John D. Johnson, attorney for the Waters-Pierce Oil Com- 
pany, was on the stand he was permitted to testify freely concerning 
what Pierce had told him of his dealings with and relations to Bailey, 
but when Gruet was on the stand strenuous objections were made, 
and sustained, to his testifying concerning the conversations that he 
had had with Pierce on the same matters. For instance, Gruet would 
have testified that Pierce had told him of having introduced Bailey 



272 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

at 26 Broadway in the fall of 1899 or the winter of 1900, and of the 
agreement then entered into whereby Bailey was to look out for the 
interests of Standard Oil in Texas. Of course, this was hearsay and 
being against Bailey, was inadmissable. 

In this connection Mr. John H. Kirby was a privileged hearsay 
witness, as is disclosed by the following language: 

Mr. Robertson: Do I understand you, after the foreclosure and 
after he had acquired the properties of the Southwestern Oil Com- 
pany under that proceeding here some months ago, the debt was paid 
and he returned the assets of the company to the person who paid it? 

A. Yes, sir; he turned over the whole thing to John F. Shepley. 
Shepley is a member of the Protective Committee of the Houston 
Oil Company stockholders. 

Mr. Robertson: Then it went back into the assets of the Hous- 
ton Oil Company? 

A. No, Mr. Shepley told me — this is the place where hearsay 
goes, don't it? 

The Chairman: That's all right. (Committee Report p. 432). 

SENATOR LOONEY GROWS IMPATIENT. 

The Committee had been in session only about a week, when the 
following incident occurred. (Committee Report p. 447) : 

Senator Looney: Can't we have a general talk about when we 
are going to get through with this thing? How many more witnesses 
are to be examined here. 

The Chairman: You will have to ask Mr. Cocke about that. 

BAILEY REFUSES TO BE PHOTOGRAPHED. 

If Mr. Bailey ever refused to pose on any and all occasions, sava 
and except one time, the author finds no record of it. The exception 
referred to is thus disclosed. (Committee Report p. 680) : 

The Chairman: There is a photographer here who requests that 
he be permitted to take a photograph of the committee while Gov- 
ernor Francis is on the stand. 

Senator Bailey: JVell, I object to preserving niyself in any such 
proceedings as this. 

The Chairman: Very well, if there is any objection. 

A MATTER OF PERSONAL PRIVILEGE. 

Austin, Texas, February 13, 1907. 

The Committee was called together at 10:30 a. m., all members 
present except Mr. McGregor. 

Mr. Cocke: Will you pardon me — I won't take long of the 
Committee — I rise to a point of personal privilege, as a member of 
the Legislature, appearing before a legislative committee. From the 
newspapers this morning I see that they report that Mr. Bailey — I 
am sorry that he is not here — called me a liar on yesterday. I did 
not so understand it at that time. 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 273 

Mr. Wolfe: What paper is that? 

Mr. Cocke: I saw it in the Chronicle and in the Express and 
in the Gazette. I want to say that I was telling the Committee, at 
the invitation of Colonel Cobbs, what I expected to prove by J. D. 
Suggs, and Mr. Bailey denounced the alleged fact expected to be 
proven as a lie, and the man who said it as a fact "a liar." I did not 
take it that that applied to me personally. If it did and if it does — 

Mr. Hanger: You are right about that. 

Mr. Cocke: Well, Senator Hanger, I want to finish my state- 
ment. I want to say that if I am mistaken, and Mr. Bailey intended 
to call me a liar, I would simply consider the source, under these cir- 
cumstances, and say further, that I have always felt that only cats 
and dogs fight, not gentlemen, and further, that only bullies brawl 
and try to browbeat. * * * Well, however it is, I want to say 
that I did not so construe it at the time, and if it is to be properly con- 
strued, what I have said with reference to gentlemen not indulging 
in such things is simply intended to put the record — 

Mr. Jenkins: I did not understand Senator Bailey to make his 
remarks to Mr. Cocke at all. I did not understand that Mr. Cocke 
was asserting that these things were true. He did not pretend to 
know anything about it. He simply stated he was informed that 
certain witnesses would testify to certain things, and Senator Bailey 
said in fact that if they did they would testify to a lie. 

ODELL DRUNK AND INSULTING. 

While the Waters-Pierce Oil Company's witness. Auditor Hutch- 
inson, was on cross-examination (Committee Report p. 723) the fol- 
lowing proceedings were had: 

By Mr. Cocke: 

Q. Are the vouchers supposedly on file in St. Louis now? 

A. To the best of my knowledge they ought to be on file in St. 
Louis. 

Q. Then if the committee could find the vouchers that would 
explain those items? 

Mr. Odell : That is an opinion and conclusion, and known to be 
false that the committee could find fifty-four items there. 

Mr. Cocke: I do not see why the word "false" is used. 

Mr. Odell: I used it because I meant it. I have sat here and 
heard you undertake to browbeat and intimidate witnesses as long 
as I am going to without slapping your jaws. 

Mr. Cocke: Well, I declare. 

The Chairman: There is no use talking that way. We will 
proceed here orderly, and let us get through with this trial. This is 
a committee acting under the rules of the district court. I think the 
question is perfectly proper, and I think you are entitled to answer 

Mr. Odell: Gentlemen are expecting me to protect their rec- 
ords. [The Oil Co. "gentlemen."] 

The Chairman: If you will make an objection I will protect 



274 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

the record, and do not let us have any unseemly evidence of temper. 
You have got plenty of time to be patient about it, and I will pro- 
tect you. 

Mr. Wolfe: Now, what was the ruling of the Chairman? 

The Chairman: I ruled that the question as I understood it was 
proper, if the vouchers would not disclose what the expenditures 
were made. Now, if they seek to follow up that inquiry by going 
into the details of the vouchers, the way to do is to make an objection 
and to get a ruling on it. 

Mr. Cocke: Now, Mr. Hutchinson, will the vouchers sup- 
posedly on file with the company in St. Louis give this committee the 
fullest information obtainable as to those fifty-four expenditures dur- 
ing the first six months of 1900 with reference to the company's legal 
business in Texas? 

A. I do not know. 

Q. Why don't you know? 

A. Because I have not got the records before me. 

ODELL UP FOR CONTEMPT. 

On the following day, February 16, 1907 (Committee Report p. 
776), Mr. Odell was held in contempt of the Committee in the fol- 
lowing language by the Chairman: 

The Chairman: Now, gentlemen, there is an incident occurred 
last night that in the judgment of the Committee, and acted upon 
by the Committee, it is the sense of the Committee that the conduct 
and expressions used by Senator Odell were in contempt of this Com- 
mittee, and it is their judgment that Senator Odell should purge him- 
self of that contempt in this Committee this morning. And it is also 
the purpose of this Committee that we are not here by virtue of our 
own volition but are sent here for a commission, and it is the pur- 
pose of the Committee that no other unseemly conduct shall char- 
acterize its proceedings, and I hope that it won't be necessary for me 
to put this purpose of the Committee into execution, but I shall do so 
if occasion arises again. 

Thereupon Mr. Odell, who had gotten somewhat over his drunk 
of the night before and which condition was perfectly apparent at 
the time to every one present, got up and apologized to the Commit- 
tee and thus purged himself of the contempt. // may be remarked in 
passing tliat if the Committee had held Bailey in contempt a few times 
when he grew boisterous, dictatorial and domineering, it would have 
been in the interest of a fair investigation. 

COBBS, ODELL AND ATTORNEY PENN WOULD SHUT OFF THE LIGHT. 

While the books of the Waters-Pierce Oil Company were before 
the Committee, Attorney R. L. Penn, of the law firm of Cockran & 
Penn, attorneys for the Waters-Pierce Oil Company at Austin, was 
constantly present to watch the proceedings and see that the hooks 
were not used too freely. In this connection the following proceed- 
ings were of interest (Committee Report pp. 783-785) : 



The Polilical Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 275 

Q. Mr. Hutchinson, kindly refer to the books here and see what 
was charged off to legal expense and then to profit and loss at the 
close of 1900, you having testified that the expenditures and dis- 
bursements for the same purpose at the close of June, 1900, was 
$11,590 — now, see what it was in December 31, 1900? 

A. December 31, 1900, was $11,888.68. 

Q. And look at the journal, on that item and analyze it for us, 
please. 

A. Do you want me to give an analysis of it as it appears here? 

Mr. Cobbs: Does that refer to these items that you have been 
speaking of, these vouchers, any of them? 

Mr. Robertson takes the chair. 

Mr. Odell: fp'ell, we object, Mr. Chairman, to what the books 
of this company would show in December, 1900, on December 31, 
1900, for the reason that it is a matter not inquired by us in the first 
place; in the second place, it is a private transaction recorded in the 
books of this company that ought not to be made public. 

The Chairman: I will say this, you can inquire into any matter 
that is connected with this anti-trust suit at Waco and these entries 
you have been inquiring about. 

Q. Then looking at this footing, for that purpose, can you tes- 
tify as to what items, how many and what amounts, enter into that 
$11,800 affecting the readmission of the Waters-Pierce Oil Company 
into Texas or the litigation then pending in the courts at Waco against 
the company or against Mr. Pierce? 

Mr. Cobbs: Mr. Chairman, I am going to make an objection 
here as to the scope of these questions. Now, we cannot anticipate 
what expenses have been paid by the company in which this Com- 
mittee has no right to go on and call in question the acts of other 
parties. It is enough, Mr. Chairman, to investigate the man charged 
without investigating everybody else who might be charged or might 
be affected by something in this testimony reflecting upon gentlemen 
probably who would want to come here and testify. I don't know to 
whom any amounts may be paid or anything about that, but I think 
we will perform our duty when we confine the examination to any- 
thing that affects Senator Bailey and no one else, and the scope of 
that question is so broad and the examination may be leading to so 
many different avenues that we will be here the balance of the year 
making this investigation, and for economy of time and for protect- 
ing other people from having their names brought into the newspa- 
pers and demanding an investigation thai will take up more testi- 
mony, I make this objection. 

Mr. Cocke: I would like, Mr. Chairman, to have the privilege 
of examining the books now before the Committee, especially the 
journals, the private ledgers that show these outlays incident to the 
readmission and litigation then pending, and also to have the privi- 
lege to carefully go through these voucher records and ascertain 
whether or not there are any entries contained in these books that 



276 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

would throw light on the allegation that there was a conspiracy be- 
tween these parties, and that these several sums of money, especially 
the hundred thousand dollars^ 

The Chairman: You want permission to examine the books — 
how long a time would it take you? 

Mr. Cocke: It will take some time. I understand counsel have 
an objection to it. 

Mr. Penn: Mr. Chairman, these books are brought here vol- 
untarily by the Waters-Pierce Oil Company for the purpose of al- 
lowing this Committee to go into them in view of these vouchers that 
are under investigation before this Committee. The company is 
perfectly willing for the Committee to have everything there is in 
those books with reference to those vouchers, but it was never con- 
templated that the members of this Committee, Mr. Cocke or any 
one else, should be permitted to go into an exploring or fishing expe- 
dition into these books, and it was my understanding at the time that 
these books were brought here — I was the representative of the com- 
pany here speaking for them, at the time they were first brought here 
— that it was not the desire or intention of the Committee to under- 
take to go through these books outside of the entries affecting these 
specific charges that are under investigation here * * * I am 
the custodian of them before this Committee and on behalf of the 
company while tendering to the Committee the fullest opportunity 
to examine all entries in these books relating to these vouchers, I must 
refuse to allow Mr. Cocke or anyone else, to go into a general exam- 
ination of these books which will disclose all of the private business 
of the company, matters in Missouri, Oklahoma, Arkansas, Louisiana 
and the Republic of Mexico, with the hope of thereby discovering 
something having a bearing on this matter. If there is some specific 
thing in these books that has a bearing on this matter, let us know 
what it is and then you are welcome to it, but we do object to any at- 
tempt at going on a fishing expedition through these books. 

(Here follows a discussion at great length between Mr. Cocke, 
Mr. Penn and members of the Committee with reference to the 
above matter). 

The Chairman: I don't think they are admissable, gentlemen. 

WITNESS WAITS FOR WINK FROM BAILEY'S LAWYERS. 

While Bailey's witness, Hutchinson, auditor for the Oil Trust, 
was on the stand, under cross-examination, he would hesitate and re- 
fuse to answer questions until he had looked over and received a sig- 
nal of some sort from Bailey's lawyers. At this conduct the propo- 
nent of the charges vainly protested (Committee Report p. 788) as 
follows: 

Mr. Cocke: Mr. Chairman, I want to protest against what ap- 
pears to me — while Judge Penn makes his examination — an undue 
disposition on the part of this witness — ■ 

Mr. Chairman : Well, I won't hear it. 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 277 

Mr. Cocke: Mr. Chairman, the witness will not answer my 
questions until he looks over here to see whether an objection is com- 
ing, and I think the committee is entitled to have this witness — 

The Chairman: IV ell, I am not going to let you lecture this 
witness — (Here follows a long discussion between Mr. Hanger, Sen- 
ator Bailey and the Chairman as to certain improprieties indulged 
in). 

It will be observed from the above last quoted parenthesis that 
the reporter for the Committee was instructed to leave out the long 
discussion between Mr. Hanger, Senator Bailey and the Chairman, 
"as to certain improprieties indulged in." This was one of the times 
Bailey exploded to the Committee's great alarm and intimidation — 
hence the omission of details by the reporter, under instructions from 
the Committee. The Committee, or at least five or six members, were 
subservient to Bailey's dictation and were in mortal fear lest "a scene" 
should ensue. Bailey was boisterous and boastful and vindictive and 
bitter and dictatorial and vicious in these side-plays that the Com- 
mittee has evidently left out of its report. He had around him a body 
guard from time to time and he and his coterie were apparently 
anxious to provoke the proponent of the charges into the loss of his 
temper and self-control, in order, the author has always believed, 
partially at least, to have an opportunity by which they might, with 
so-called justification, shoot him down. The proponent of the 
charges, however, was engaged in a serious public undertaking and 
did not propose to be swerved from the people's business by the cheap 
and intemperate methods of would-be assassins. 

LOONEY OBJECTS TO EXPERT TESTIMONY. 

While the witness Hutchinson was under cross-examination by 
Judge Poindexter, Senator Looney, afterwards one of Bailey's candi- 
dates for Attorney General of Texas, could not remain in the 
calm attitude of a judge, mucli less pursue the course of an investi- 
gator. On the contrary he frequently injected himself in the record 
as an objector, of which the following is an illustration (Committee 
Report p. 790) : 

A. It signified to my mind that Mr. Pierce had advanced the 
money out of his own personal — 

Senator Looney: I don't think we can try this case on infer- 
ences and conclusions. 

The Chairman: He is testifying as an expert bookkeeper as to 
what the books indicate. 

Senator Looney: I understand that an expert's testimony is ad- 
missible only on an expert proposition. Any man can judge of that. 
If you propose to introduce him as an expert — 

The Chairman: I understood that is the capacity in which he 
is testifying. 

Senator Looney: Then I raise the objection that this is not a 
scientific proposition that an expert knows anything more about than 
any other common layman. 



278 Senator J. If. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

COBBS PROTESTS OVER MUCH. 

While the investigation was in progress at Austin, T. D. Cobbs, 
who was supposed to be a member of the Investigation Committee, 
but along with Wolfe, of the House Committee, and Looney, of the 
Senate Committee, becmne as active in the defense of Bailey as his 
own lawyers, invited Bailey to pay him a visit at San Antonio. This 
was similar to a district judge entertaining an indicted man, under 
trial at his bar. The record is burdened with objections to testimony 
by Cobbs et al., of which the following is one (Committee Report 
p. 800) : 

Q. Does it mean Mr. Pierce had loaned $3,300 for the benefit of 
the Waters-Pierce Oil Company and had taken a note and turned 
the note over to them or had taken a due bill or some evidence of in- 
debtedness? 

Mr. Cobbs: / think I will object to that question, asking for a 
conclusion of a witness who is a bookkeeper, whether or not it was 
done for the benefit of the Waters-Pierce Oil Company. 

Mr. Jenkins: I am not asking for whose benefit it is done. 

Mr. Cobbs: I would hate to be tried on questions of that sort, 
when it is somebody else's transactions, a transaction for somebody 
else. 

Mr. Jenkins: These entries mean something or they mean noth- 
ing. We are entitled to know what it is. 

Mr. Robertson (as Chairman) : I think the question is proper. 

Mr. Cobbs: Note my protest to that. 

BAILEY REFUSES EXAMINATION BY COCKE OR HIS COUNSEL. 

At the conclusion of Bailey's examination in chief (Committee 
Report pp. 825-932) Odell, as Bailey's leading counsel, said: 

I have this further statement to make to the Committee: As far 
as we are concerned, we have concluded with the hearing, in so far as 
Senator Bailey's own statement is to be heard at this particular time. 
We now tender Senator Bailey to both the House and Senate Com- 
mittee for the purpose of having him interrogated to the fullest con- 
cerning all these matters about which he has made his statement. The 
Senate Committee is represented here, not only by eminent lawyers 
who compose that Committee, but by special counsel. The House 
Committee is represented here by its own members, who are not only 
good lawyers, but most, if not all of them, distinguished lawyers in 
their profession. Many of the members of both the Houses, I say 
many of them — I will say some of them, some of the members of both 
the House and the Senate committee have at least heretofore been 
opposed to Senator Bailey, and were strong adherents of the original 
resolution known as the "Duncan Resolution," pending both before 
the Senate and House. It has occurred to counsel for Senator Bailey 
that, while it would be entirely proper to submit him for any cross- 
examination by these two committees, composed as I have heretofore 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 279 

Stated, to any cross-examination on the part of counsel representing 
the Senate Committee, that we would be derelict in our duty to both, 
to the committees, to the country, and to Senator Bailey, if we did not 
suggest on /lis behalf that it would be entirely improper for him to 
be examined by the proponent of the charges, for the reason, among 
other things, that the charges in themselves carry with them such 
reflections on the standing and character of Senator Bailey as a man 
and as a Senator, that no self-respecting man under the circumstances 
could or would submit himself to an examination by the proponent 
of the charges under the circumstances. In the second place, the 
charges in themselves are of such a nature that it has occurred to us 
that the proponent of the charges, undertaking to examine Senator 
Bailey touching them, would of necessity be provocative of such a 
possible scene of disorder in this Committee as to be unseemly, un- 
timely and uncalled for, and, therefore, for the purpose of preserv- 
ing the decorum of this investigation, to the end that the truth may 
be fairly arrived at and fully elicited by the examination, [?] that 
this Committee is not only capable of but will undertake it. In the 
examination of Senator Bailey as a final result of the conference of 
Senator Bailey's counsel, we have determined to enter our protest 
against any proposed examination of him by the proponent of the 
charges in the first place, and in the second place, now inform the 
Committee that Senator Bailey will not submit to it. With this 
Statement Senator Bailey is in the hands of the Committee for the 
purpose of being cross-examined to the very fullest, with reference 
to these charges. 

COCKE EARNESTLY PROTESTS. 

After some discussion by the Committee, and seeing that the Com- 
mittee would probably not require Bailey to submit to a cross-exami- 
nation by the proponent of the charges, notwithstanding the Com- 
mittee and Bailey's lawyers had made every promise at the outset so 
to do, when Bailey refused to take the stand, Mr. Cocke (Committee 
Report pp. 934-935) said: 

Mr. Cocke : Mr. Chairman, I believe that my conduct through- 
out these proceedings, while not tempered with that discretion that 
should always characterize a man's conduct, perhaps, and while 
exhibiting at times possibly a degree of zeal and feeling natural to 
one who believes himself engaged in a righteous cause, may have 
been calculated to bestir sentiments of resentment and possibly of an- 
ger by gentlemen taking a different view ; nevertheless, I think it will 
be conceded upon sober reflection that I have not been disposd to dis- 
turb the orderly conduct of your hearings nor to detract from the 
dignity of these proceedings. When I prepared these charges it was 
done without consultation with hardly a human being. They were 
not, as some have been disposed to think, the emanation of other gen- 
tlemen, those hostile to Mr. Bailey; they were prepared as a result 
of the invitation of himself and his friends looking to an examination 

1-20 



280 Senator J. JV. Bailey of Texas Unniasked 

into the truth or falsity of the charges made and then current, and 
were made without the slightest feeling of anger or enmity on my 
part. While the language of the charges may sometime have been 
inaptly couched, they were nevertheless inspired by a patriotic mo- 
tive, and, indeed, much as gentlemen may be unable to see it, with 
sorrow in my heart that such expressions and such charges by virtue 
of legislative developments with reference to the investigation, 
should be necessary. I realized the importance and responsibility 
assumed, and I therefore took the precaution in filing the charges, 
to ask the committee's permission to withdraw those charges unless 
I should be permitted to be present and seek, so far as I might in my 
earnest way, to look into their truth or their falsity. I thought that 
much was due to me, assuming the responsibility invited to be as- 
sumed by the Legislature. I acted in good faith on Mr. Bailey's 
own suggestion to the Legislature, that in one way or another, 
through his friends, perhaps, that he was luilling to submit to a thor- 
ough investigation, if any one would assume the responsibility of 
formulating the charges. It is unnecessary for me to consume the 
time of the committee with a rehearsal of the incidents of your early 
meetings, hearings and the efforts one way and another to secure 
counsel for the proponent of the charges, and I now feel that an in- 
justice has been done me, not intentionally perhaps, by any one, but 
nevertheless an injustice, in not advising me candidly some days ago 
that this would be the situation at this juncture. I had even thought, 
in view of the newspaper reports and rumors and feeling that 
had been injected here, of the propriety of asking the committee to 
elicit from the counsel for Mr. Bailey an expression on this point, 
so that I might make an extraordinary effort to secure counsel, if 1 
regarded it as important. I have no criticism to offer of counsel on 
jj the opposition. I have no doubt they have pursued their employ- 

I ment, whatever it may be, whether friendly or otherwise, as to them 

seemed proper and right. I do think now, however, gentlemen, that 
it is an injustice to me not to allow m.e to develop these charges as I 
believe they should be developed, in a thorough and searching 
cross-examination of Mr. Bailey. I should endeavor to 
display no feeling and no unjust imputations that would be calcu- 
lated to injure the man's feelings. On the other hand, I know of no 
way to carefully and thoroughly investigate serious charges involv- 
ing the personal and political integrity of a man — and I am not 
speaking now as to their truth or falsity — without asking questions 
that must be necessarily embarrassing. I don't see how this com- 
mittee, I don't see how Mr. Bailey's counsel or Mr. Bailey himself 
could expect questions to be asked here that would not be embarrass- 
ing, if they went to the bottom of this investigation. Now, I am 
disposed, as I have always been disposed, to yield to the forms of 
constituted authority, although I may at times believe they exist in 
form and not in substance. At the same time, having made this 
statement, 1 shall ask this committee to take a vote on this question, 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 281 

and if they vote that I have not the right, of course I shall in the na- 
ture of things be compelled to yield to their conclusions. In that 
case, however, gentlemen, I have prepared a large number of ques- 
tions, typewritten questions, that I desire the committee shall have 
asked Mr. Bailey if they deny me that privilege. That is another 
question for your consideration. I do feel that I should have had 
notice of this some days ago, and I even now, perhaps, feel it is due 
me that the committee should adjourn these hearings until I can get 
a competent attorney to represent me in this matter. * * * Judge 
Poindexter does not want to be put in the attitude of representing the 
prosecution, as it is called, in this proceeding. 1 realize also that it 
would be extremely difficult for any attorney to come here now, not 
having been present throughout these proceedings, and conduct this 
examination. I believe that my familiarity with the testimony, both 
before this committee and as a result of such investigations as I have 
had time and opportunity to make with the limited resources that I 
have at my command, that there are some questions, without assuming 
any undue modesty in the matter, that I might propound which would 
be calculated to elicit the truth to a degree that would hardly be pos- 
sible of any one not present throughout the hearings. Having made 
this statement and desiring that you shall have in mind the questions 
that I have prepared, I leave the matter with the committee. 

SENATOR SENTER'S VIEWS. 

The proponent of the charges had been without counsel for 
about four out of the six weeks consumed by the investigation, on ac- 
count of the fact that General Crane and Judge Cockrell could not 
remain away from their private engagements so long, and on ac- 
count of the further fact that the Committee refused to allow the 
proponent of the charges to make other arrangements for legal as- 
sistance. The truth of the business is that the Covnnittee was simply 
cowed and afraid to undertake to force Bailey to submit to a search- 
ing cross-examination. Several members of the committee came to 
the proponent of the charges and requested him to waive his right to 
examine Mr. Bailey. This he refused to do, telling them if they 
did not have nerve enough to make Bailey behave himself they 
would at least have to get in the record as voting to deny the propo- 
nent of the charges the right, which they all conceded to be a right, 
to examine Mr. Bailey just the same as any other witness. In con- 
nection with this discussion Senator E. G. Senter, of the Senate 
Committee said (Committee Report p. 935) : 

Mr. Chairman, I desire to make this statement: I think as sug- 
gested by Mr. Odell, Senator Odell, that there is no occasion here for 
anything that may disturb the peaceable progress of these proceed- 
ings, but in the attitude in which this is now left, the proponent of 
the charges is left without an attorney before these proceedings, be- 
fore this Committee. Now. I feel that I would be doing violence to 



282 Senator J. W. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

my own conviction of what is fair and just, just as just to me as it is 
to tiiose who oppose me in this matter, that the proponent of the 
charges should not be left in the attitude of being without an attor- 
ney. The House committee has, for reasons, not seen fit to per- 
mit him to be represented by some gentlemen here, atid the net result 
of the matter is, he has been left to conduct his own case. It is a mat- 
ter in which I think he is entitled to an attorney, and I do think, and 
I now want to register my protest, so far as I am in any degree re- 
sponsible for these proceedings, I do think that if he is not permit- 
ted to examine, to cross-examine Senator Bailey — and I am dis- 
posed to concede that that is not necessary in the just attainment of 
reaching the ends of justice in the matter, but I do think that under 
such circumstances he should have time to arrange for an attorney 
here, a competent attorney to represent him in the proceedings. 

From the foregoing it will be seen that Bailey not only refused to 
be examined by the individual who brought the charges against 
him, and that at his own invitation and the invitation of hts friends, 
but refused to be examined by either of the attorneys that assisted 
him in the early part of the investigation. There is perhaps 
no parallel in history where an accused, he he high or low, ever so 
completely dictated and domineered the proceedings incident to his 
trial, as Bailey did in this case. In spite of the fact that the Resolu- 
tion was drawn for his protection, rather than for his investigation; 
in spite of the fact that a majority of the committee were determined 
beforehand to proclaim him guiltless, however guilty; in spite of 
the fact that said committee had, at about the first meeting thereof, 
actually agreed to accept Bailey's three lawyers as counsel for the 
committee; in spite of the fact that the committee sought to exclude 
the proponent of the charges from its hearings (and would have 
done so except he had taken the precaution of reserving the right to 
withdraw the charges unless they allowed him to be present) ; in 
spite of the committee limiting the proponent of the charges in the 
selection of his attorneys (which finally resulted in his being with- 
out counsel most of the time) ; in spite of the fact that the rules 
adopted by the committee and the construction placed thereon from 
time to time were intended to shield the accused in every way pos- 
sible; in spite of Bailey's refusal to be cross-examined in a search- 
ing, exhaustive and aggressive fashion; in spite of all that, Bailey, 
with his pomp, his riches, his prestige, his power, and with the aid 
of his three shrewd, cunning and consciousless attorneys, as well as 
with the aid of a number of partisan attorneys on the committees — 
in spite of all this, his record was so indefensible and the case against 
him in its material aspects was so malodorous and strong as to con- 
demn him utterly in the minds of all those who will take the pains 
and exercise the patience to peruse the following chapters setting 
forth the testimony. 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 283 

BAILEY BALKS AGAIN. 

Towards the conclusion of the cross-examination of Bailey, 
such cross-examination as it was, the proponent of the charges be- 
ing wholly dissatisfied with the character of examination to which 
Bailey had been subjected said (Committee Report pp. 982-3) : 

Mr. Cocke: Mr. Chairman, it is just a few minutes before we 
adjourn at the noon hour — Colonel Jenkins does not feel like ask- 
ing the bulk of questions I had prepared, and in view of that possi- 
bility, I telephoned last evening to my attorneys and secured from 
them a promise that either Judge Cockrell or General Crane would 
come down tonight and be here in the morning, provided the hear- 
ing would be on, and I would be given an opportunity to cross-exam- 
ine at that time. I do not mean to be lacking in the profoundest 
respect for the gentleman who has entered into this cross-examina- 
tion, or the gentlemen of the committee who might do so, though I 
do not feel that this cross-examination has been of that incisive, ag- 
gressive kind that is calculated to elicit all the truth, and I therefore, 
ask the committee to assure me that this cross-examination may be 
continued tomorrow, whereupon I will have either Judge Cockrell 
or General Crane come down on the train tonight. 

The Chairman: Well, that is a matter for the committee. 

Mr. Cobbs: Mr. Chairman, it is twelve o'clock and some of the 
committeemen are down stairs engaged, and I move we adjourn, take 
a recess until after dinner, and then we can determine that. 

Senator Bailey: I simply want to say this, neither this propo- 
nent of these charges nor Crane nor Cockrell nor any other man 
who has ever assailed my personal or political integrity will be per- 
mitted to interrogate me. I have allowed those men to talk about me 
in the papers and on the stump, but no living man is going to sit to 
my face and insult me with those questions, and the committee might 
just as well know it. (Committee Report p. 983.) 

And thus did the innocent Standard Oil misrepresentative of Texas 
escape from answering a few plain questions by the proponent of the 
charges (or his attorneys) to whom he has been pleased to refer as "The 
Little Idiot from San Antonio." 



284 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 



ANTIDOTES FOR BAILEYISM. 



Cunning has effect from the credulity of others. It requires no 
extraordinary talents to lie and deceive. — Johnson. 

A fool may have his coat embroidered with gold, but it is a fool's 
coat still. — Rivarol. 

The first step in debt is like the first step in false-hood, involving 
the necessity of going on in the same course, debt following debt, as 
lie follows lie. — S. Smiles. 

Debt is to a man what the serpent is to the bird; its eye fascinates, 
its breath poisons, its coil crushes sinew and bone, its jaw is the piti- 
less grave. — Bulwer. 

The rake-off, the draw-back, the rebate, and the secretly em- 
ployed political lawyer, are as corrupt and corrupting in politics 
as they are dishonest in business and vicious in morals. — The Author. 

The rich ruleth over the poor and the borrower is servant to the 
lender. — The Scripture. 

There are none so blind as those who refuse to see. — Anon. 

Deceivers are the most dangerous members of society. — They 
trifle with the best affections of our nature, and violate the most sa- 
cred obligations.— CraZ'^e. 

No man, for any considerable period, can wear one face to him- 
self and another to the multitude, without finally getting bewildered 
as to which may be true. — Hawthorne. 

The rebater and the grafter in political and industrial life, are 
essentially as criminal as the horse thief or the highwayman; both 
classes are, or should be, outlaws. — The Author. 

It is as easy to deceive one's self without perceiving it, as it is 
difficult to deceive others without their finding it out. — Rochefau- 
cauld. 

O, what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to de- 
ceive. — Walter Scott. 

Mankind, in the gross, is a gaping monster, that loves to be de- 
ceived, and has seldom been disappointed. — Mackenzie. 

He that ruleth his own spirit is greater than he that taketh a city. 
— Proverbs of Solomon. 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 285 

When desperate ills demand a speedy cure, distrust is cowardice, 
and prudence folly. — Johnson. 

The horse thief and the highwayman commit overt acts of out- 
lawery, while the political grafter, Brutus-like, stealthily stabs the 
people, whom he falsely professes to love, and Judas-like, betrays 
them with a kiss. — The Author. 

Defeat is a school in which truth always grows strong. — H. W. 
Beecher. 

The worst deluded are the self-deluded. — Bovee. 

We strive as hard to hide our hearts from ourselves as from oth- 
ers, and always with more success; for in deciding upon our own case 
we are both judge, jury, and executioner, and where sophistry cannot 
overcome the first, or flattery the second, self-love is always ready to 
defeat the sentence by bribing the third. — Colton. 

No degree of knowledge attainable by man is able to set him 
above the want of hourly assistance. — Johnson. 

The man who enters or remains in the public service, expecting 
thereby to become rich, had better never been born; such expectation 
will either be disappointed, or gratified at the expense of the people. 
— The Author. 

He that oppresseth the poor to increase his riches, reproacheth 
his Maker, and shall surely come to want. — The Scriptures. 

We are but the instruments of heaven; our work is not design, but 
destiny. — Owen Meredith. 

No sooner is a temple built to God, but the devil builds a chapel 
hard by. — Herbert. 

The inward sighs of humble penitence rise to the ear of heaven, 
when pealed hymns are scattered to the common air. — Joanna 
Bail lie. 

True dignity is never gained by place, and never lost when hon- 
ors are withdrawn. — Massinger. 



286 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 



CHAPTER XIV. 

BAILEY PRACTICES BEFORE GOVERNMENTAL DEPART- 
MENTS "FOR LOANS," ETC. 

Bailey, like Senator Burton of Kansas, practiced influence before 
the various United States Governmental Departments at Washing- 
ton almost from the beginning of his career. Bailey practiced for 
loans, etc., Burton practiced for a fee; Bailey denounced the allega- 
tions against him in this connection as "lies"; Burton frankly ad- 
mitted his single transaction, and was sent to jail. He is quoted as 
having afterwards said that he, like his conferee Bailey, "should 
have taken a loan." 

BAILEY ON BURTON. 

When Senator Burton was called to answer, in the Federal 
Courts, for his misstep, Bailey became righteously indignant (?) 
and vehemently impatient that the Senate should summarily act on 
Senator Burton's case without waiting for him to prove his guilt or 
innocence before the courts. Bailey even said that Burton "ought 
to resign and give his people a chance to fill his place while the case 
against him proceeds." Why, then, did not Bailey resign from the 
United States Senate while his case proceeded before the Texas Leg- 
islature? And why did he not refuse an election until after his in- 
vestigation? And since he wrote his own vindication, or had it 
written in his presence in the cloisters of his hotel, and since that 
vindication has not, in fact, vindicated him with unnumbered thou- 
sands of his constituents, why, according to his own advice to the 
Senate in Burton's case, does he not "resign and give his people a 
chance to fill his place"? For Bailey said to the Senate also con- 
cerning Burton: "Unless he represents a constituency unlike any 
that I have ever known, if he can vindicate himself against the 
charge, they will call him back into their honorable service with re- 
newed devotion to him." The injunction, "Physician heal thyself," 
seems never to have impressed itself on the mind of the irate Stand- 
ard Oil Senator from Texas. 

But to give Mr. Bailey the benefit of his own words concerning 
Burton (Congressional Record, December i8, 1905, p. 501), "I be- 
lieve the rule — the best and safest rule — is that when a senator finds 
himself compelled, by a sense of delicacy towards his associates, to 
absent himself from the senate, he ought to resign and give his people 
a chance to fill his place while the case against him proceeds, and, 
unless he represents a constituency unlike any that I have ever 
known, if he can vindicate himself against the charge they will call 
him back into their honorable service with renewed devotion to him. 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 287 

But if a senator so situated will not resign, the senate ought either to 
relieve him from the sense of delicacy which keeps him from the 
chamber or else it ought to relieve his state from the representation 
of a man that it will not allow to exercise the rights and privileges of 
his great office. 

"There have been within the last ten years five indictments of 
senators, and each of those indictments implied a crime committed 
for the sake of money. It is time that the senate was testifying to the 
world that this is no place for a man who wants to make money il- 
legally or unfairly, not to say dishonestly. 

"If a man in an unfortunate personal encounter should be com- 
pelled to take the life of his fellowman, that might or might not un- 
fit him to be a senator. It would depend entirely upon the provo- 
cation. It sometimes happens that high-minded men are com- 
pelled, by a sense of self-respect, to slay; but it never happens that 
a high-minded man attempts to line his pockets with dishonest gain. 

"The only question in my mind for the senate to decide is 
whether the senator attempted to traffic in his great office. If he 
did, there is no justification for him; if he did not, we ought to cer- 
tify to the world that he has been accused without sufficient reason. 

"I protest against leaving the senate to suffer under the ribald 
jests of many good men while the court slowly proceeds with an in- 
quiry which we ought to conduct and conclude without delay." 

Texas and Texans throughout the entire United States are now 
called "to sufTer under the ribald jests" of all intelligent men who 
laugh and sneer at the people of Texas for their blind adherence 
to their erstwhile idol. Verily we have become the laughing stock 
of the nation. 

LAW OF LOANS LN TEXAS. 

While the following Texas Statute, Section i6o. Page c;i;9, Gen- 
eral Laws, Twenty-Ninth Legislature, technically applies to Texas 
elections alone, nevertheless it discloses the principle and practice of 
the law of political loans and denounces the lender as "a felon," to be 
confined in the penitentiary and renders him "incapable of holding 
any office under the State of Texas." Said Statute is as follows: 
"Any person who lends or contributes or ofifers or promises to lend 
or contribute or pay any money or other valuable thing to any voter, 
to influence the vote of any other person, whether under the guise 
of a wager or otherwise, or to induce any voter to vote or refrain 
from voting at an election for or against any person or persons, or 
for or against any particular proposition submitted at an election, or 
to induce such voter to go to the polls or to remain away from the 
polls at an election, or to induce such voter or other person to place 
or cause to be placed his name unlawfully on the certified list of 
qualified voters that is required to be furnished by the county tax 
collector, is guilty of a felony, and on conviction shall be punished 
by confinement in the penitentiary not less than one year nor more 



288 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

than five years, and in addition shall forfeit any office to which he 
may have been elected at the election with reference to which such 
ofifense may have been committed, and is rendered incapable of hold- 
ing any office under the State of Texas." 

The foregoing Statute would apply in principle not only to 
Francis and Pierce in their numerous "loans" to Bailey but to all 
the other individuals who paid tribute to his influence in the forms 
of so-called loans, endorsements, etc., as disclosed by the minor or 
supplemental charges in this chapter reviewed. 

Just as the foregoing Statute describes the crime and the penalty 
of the political money "lender," so also does the following Statute 
describe the crime and penalty applicable to the political "bor- 
rower" — in this case J. W. Bailey. 

"The penalty prescribed in the last preceding section against 
those who violate any of its provisions shall be imposed on any one 
who receives or agrees to receive any money, gift, loan or other 
thing of value, for himself or any other person, for voting or agree- 
ing to vote, for going or agreeing to go to the polls on election day, 
or for remaining away, or agreeing to remain away from the polls 
on election day, or for refraining or agreeing to refrain from obtain- 
ing his poll tax receipt or certificate of exemption, or for obtaining 
or agreeing to obtain the same, or for voting or agreeing to vote for 
or against any particular person or proposition submitted to a vote 
of the people." 

In principle, then, under Texas Law, a man who makes political 
loans or receives political loans is a felon to be confined in our pen- 
itentiary and "rendered incapable of holding any office under the 
State of Texas." 

GOVERNMENT MULE CONTRACT. 
CHARGE NO. I. 

The following evidence in support of the minor charges against 
Mr. Bailey, sufficient in themselves, however, to disqualify him as 
Senator from Texas, was presented to the Investigation Committee of 
1907, including some excluded testimony. In each case Mr. Bailey's 
own testimony is first given. 

Charge number J was as follows: "That J. W. Bailey, while a 
member of the United States Congress, became financially interested 
in a certain mule contract with the United States Government, in 
violation of the law and in contravention of his Congressional du- 
ties, said contract having been procured for one Steger, or Steger & 
Labatt, of Texas, by said J. W. Bailey." 

The ivitness Bailey (continuing p. 902) : That is a pure, una- 
dulterated lie from beginning to end, without a shadow of truth in 
it. The fact of it is that the contract was procured before I knew 
a word about it. The first I knew about the contract was when Mr. 
Steger came from Bonham to Gainesville to see me about the failure 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 289 

of the government to receive all the mules which the government 
had bought from him, and I told him that as soon as I went to Wash- 
ington I would take it up with the War Department and see what 
could be done about it. [The only error in this charge was as to 
Bailey having secured the contract originally, whereas the proof 
showed that Bailey assisted in getting the War Department to com- 
plete the contract, which, in effect, was the same thing. That is, it 
was practice before the Government Department for which Bailey 
so severely condemned Senator Burton of Kansas.] * * * I 
think maybe I didn't get the order for those mules until February 
or March following the June or July when they were sold for deliv- 
ery, and when they had been bought and ready for delivery, I didn't 
know anything about Mr. Labatt in the transaction until afterwards, 
and either he or Mr. Steger, or both of them were talking to me 
about it. I believe Mr. Labatt secured the contract, but in view of 
the fact that Steger was to furnish the money, the correspondence 
was in his name, and that's all I had to do with it. 

The witness Bailey (continuing p. 931) : 

Senator Odell, I have had rather a peculiar view about charging 
anybody for any service in that way. Of course, I would not charge 
anybody for any service at the departments at Washington— if there 
were no law on that subject, I would not do it because I think there is 
a clear impropriety, but I have always had a different notion from 
other lawyers about it. I never charged a fee in my life for appear- 
ing before any department in the government. * * * Jt always 
appeared to me a matter of influence rather than a matter of legal 
right, and I never would take a fee in a case like that. [Anyhow 
there was always a loan or a draft or an endorsement or a "horse 
trade."] When that Spanish war was over, I had my district 
pretty well cleaned up of Spanish ponies and such as that. I felt 
like I had done my people a service. 

TESTIMONY OF J. E. LABATT. 
CAPTAIN J. E. LABATT 

was sworn and testified (Investigation Committee Report, pages 
153-159) as follows: 

I live in Fort Worth, Texas. I know Messrs. Steger of Bonham. 
Have known them for several years. I think the first contract I had 
for furnishing the United States government with mules and horses, 
in which Mr. Steger was interested, was in 1896. We had a later 
contract in 1898. I was the contractor. Mr. Steger and the banks 
furnished the money. Mr. Steger and I had a partnership agree- 
ment whereby we were to share the profits and losses — he was doing 
the buying. 

When we were ready to take down the profit the inspectors got 



290 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

them to inspect them. When he had inspected 400 he was stopped. 
I was informed by the Quartermaster General that in Cuba and the 
islands, that the streets were so narrow, that they could not use six 
mules with the wagons like they did with our army here in the 
United States, and consequently they would not take the lead mules 
for a while. 

I turned 400 in, wheelers and swings, and the government took 
398 mules, rejecting only two out of the selection we made for them. 
Mr. Steger finally, after about eight months, turned in the remain- 
ing 400 to the government. We had them on our hands, at our ex- 
pense, during that time. The whole matter was in Mr. Steger's 
hands. Since which time I have had nothing to do with it except 
waiting. Trying to get a settlement with Mr. Steger for about 
$68,000. I don't know the amount, the lawyers made that up. 
[This controversy between Steger and Labatt has no bearing on the 
case against Mr. Bailey specially. Bailey's practice before the de- 
partment came in through his successful effort to get the department 
to take the 400 lead mules from Steger and Labatt. Which was fi- 
nally done and Steger was paid the money. A part of which Bailey 
evidently received. Then it was that Labatt sued Steger for an ac- 
counting. We may well suppose after Steger got through dividing 
with Bailey, he had nothing left for Labatt.] 

STEGER IN TROUBLE WITH THE GOVERNMENT. 

JOHN W. RUSSELL 

a witness for Mr. Bailey and brother-in-law of Mr. Steger, testified 
(Bailey Investigation Committee Report, 1907, pages 283-284), in 
part as follows: 

Q. Do you know whether or not Mr. Steger had some trouble 
with the Government one time in getting that contract through? 

A. I think they failed to carry out their part of the contract, 
one part of the contract, but afterwards took it. [That is the Gov- 
ernment took the mules]. I do not know for a certain, but I think 
he [Steger] wrote to Mr. Bailey about it, but I am not sure. All I 
know is that Mr. Steger wrote to Senator Bailey [then Congressman 
Bailey] to get him to intercede for him; to call the attention of the 
proper authorities. [That is to practice influence before the de- 
partment, whether for pay in violation of the Federal law or as a 
duty to a constituent — that is the question?] 

BAILEY DRAWS ON ED. STEGER, GOVERNMENT MULE CONTRACTOR, FOR 
FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS, ETC. 

D. W. SWEENY 

a witness for the proponent of the charges, was sworn and testified 
(Bailey Investigation Committee Report, 1907, pages 281-282) as 
follows : 

My residence is Bonham, Texas; my occupation, cashier of the 



The Political life-Story of a Fallen Idol 291 

First National Bank for the last ten or twelve years. Yes, I know 
Mr. Steger was buying horses and mules for the United States Gov- 
ernment between 1897 ^"d 1901, especially in 1898 and 1899. Dur- 
ing the period, 1898-1899, one draft by Air. Bailey on Mr. Steger 
was sent through our bank. I think it was for $500. It was a plain 
draft drawn by J. W. Bailey on Ed. Steger through the Riggs Na- 
tional Bank at Washington. 

I have an indistinct recollection that there was another small 
draft for possibly $300, or might have been more. My recollection 
is distinct on the $500 draft. 

BAILEY VISITS BONHAM WITH GOVERNMENT MULE INSPECTOR. 

MR. C. H. WHITE 

of Bonham, Texas, testified (Bailey Investigation Report 1907, pp. 
282-283) in substance as follows: 

My residence is in Bonham, Texas; I have lived in Fannin 
County nearly 42 years, 17 years I have lived in Bonham; at present 
in the hotel business. 

I saw Mr. Bailey in company with Mr. Ed. Steger in the town of 
Bonham. During that time Mr. Steger was supplying the Gov- 
ernment with mules and horses in 1898- 1899, ^^^ ^^ company with 
other gentlemen, but who they were I do not know. They were 
strangers to me. I can tell you what they purported to be [Gov- 
ernment mule and horse inspectors], but as to my knowledge of it, I 
do not know. I saw him there on several occasions. I saw them at 
the hotel there together, and saw them going and coming out in a 
northern direction. [The direction of the corrals where the stock 
were being kept.] I am sure he was with Ed Steger. I saw them 
going out in a northern direction where the corral was established 
and saw them return to the hotel on several occasions. 

A MEMBER OF THE PRESENT MILLER'S TRUST TESTIFIES FOR BAILEY. 

MR. GUS STEGER 

was called by the Committee and being examined by Mr. Wolfe, a 
Bailey partisan, testified (Bailey Investigation Committee Report, 
1907, pages 284-285), in part as follows: 

I live in Bonham; I am in the milling business; a brother of Ed. 
Steger. I remember when Ed. Steger and Labatt had a contract 
with the Government for furnishing some horses and mules. I was 
a partner with my brother Ed. Steger in the matter of the mule con- 
tract as was my brother Virge, but my brother Rob was not. 

I do not know anything about the $12,500 draft which is said to 
have been drawn by Mr. Bailey against my brother Ed Steger dur- 
ing the pendency of that contract. I do not know about any draft, if 
there was ever any draft, I would not undertake to say that it is not 
true that Senator Bailey drew on my brother Ed for different 
amounts of money at dififerent times ; neither can I say whether or 



292 Senator J. W. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

not he loaned him money or endorsed for him at the time this con- 
tract was pending. We had a contract * * * and they did not 
take them up at all for six to eight months I reckon. I don't know 
just how we got the Government to continue with that contract, but 
they took them up I think February after that June, finished taking 
them up. I think Ed went to Washington once or twice to see 
about it. I think Ed said that Senator Bailey introduced him 
around at the War Department, and probably was instrumental in 
getting — any way, in helping him to have them taken up. That was 
after Captain Labatt had dropped out of the proposition. 

I admit that my brother may have had a private understanding 
with him that I knew nothing about. Of course I could not know. 
I just don't know of any correspondence. I think it was 301 head 
that we fed so long. [As usual when a shady transaction was to be 
covered up, Bailey and his lawyers or some partisan on the Commit- 
tee would drum up some stallion or bull trade as an explanation for 
otherwise apparently dirty work. So it was in this case. The de- 
fense tried to say that Bailey and Ed Steger owned a stallion together 
but none of their witnesses would undertake to testify about the date 
of the stallion deal. This witness said "he could not come within 
one or two years of it," and from the best information the author 
could gather, this stallion deal was about two years after the mule 
contract with the Government was concluded.] 

MR. W. T. GASS, A LIFE-LONG DEMOCRAT, TESTIFIES ABOUT BAILEY AND 
THE GOVERNMENT CONTRACT. 

MR. W. T. GASS 

witness for the complainant, testified, (Bailey Invest. Com. Re- 
port, 1907, pages 408-409), in substance, as follows: 

I live in Como, Hopkins county, editor of the Hopkins County 
Democrat. I know what Mr. Steger told me about the Steger and 
Labatt government mule contract. I also know that Steger bought 
about 700 head of mules and 600 head of cavalry horses in there dur- 
ing the Spanish-American War. I was living at Bonham at the time 
editing the Bonham Chronicle Weekly. All I know is what Col- 
onel Ed Steger told me — [the examination of Mr. Gass was con- 
ducted by Mr. Wolfe of the House committee just as if he was Mr. 
Bailey's lawyer and Mr. Gass was not allowed to testify to what Ed 
Steger had told him about his dealings with Bailey and the fact that 
Bailey made the Stegers divide profit with him on the government 
contract in consideration of his, Bailey's, work before the War De- 
partment. Mr. Gass is a very worthy man and would not have tes- 
tified to anything other than what Steger, one of the parties in in- 
terest, told him.] 

I saw Mr. Bailey in Bonham after this contract was filled and the 
horses delivered about two weeks afterwards I think; inside of a 
month. 

I can't tell you exactly when the stallion was shipped with refer- 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 293 

ence to the time of the completion of this mule contract. It was 
shipped though, after I saw Mr. Bailey. [That evidence puts the 
stallion trade after the $500 testified about by banker Russell had 
been paid to Bailey by Steger, which payment was made while the 
stock were yet being delivered or waiting for delivery. Indeed this 
stallion trade, that they conjured up, as an explanation, may have 
been part of the original plan. The Committee refused to let the 
sub-committee go to Bonham and further investigate the bank xtc-. 
ords and interrogate other witnesses there.] 

COLONEL ED. STEGER APPEALS TO BAILEY CONCERNING MULE CON- 
TRACT. 

COL. ED. STEGER 

a Bailey witness, of Bonham, contradicts Banker Russel and other 
evidences of his having paid Bailey for practicing before the War 
Department, as shown by his testimony (Bailey Invest. Com. Re- 
port, 1907, pp. 501-508.) 

I had trouble in getting the Government to accept all the mules 
and horses — 300 mules in 1898. I solicited the services of Senator 
Bailey in my behalf. I went to Washington and appealed to Mr. 
Bailey, who was then my Congressman, to help me get an order from 
the War Department to send back the same inspector, Major Tom 
Cruse, and he took the 300 mules in February. Nothing was ever 
said about my paying for the services. He never drew any checks 
or drafts in that connection. I did not know Mr. Bailey very well 
before then but it was during that time that I got very well ac- 
quainted with him. I had tried every other means to get the mules 
taken up before I appealed to him; made a trip to Washington and 
two or three trips to St. Louis in the spring or summer of 1898. 
They kept putting me off until finally Senator Bailey got them to 
send the inspector down to take the remaining 300 mules, in Feb- 
ruary ['99]. I know I made one trip to Washington, perhaps two 
or three, met Senator Bailey there and went with him to the Depart- 
ment. 

If any one has testified that a draft for $500 was drawn on me be- 
fore the final delivery of those mules by Senator Bailey, I think that 
is a mistake. I have no recollection of any such draft. I have no 
recollection of a $500 draft at all. 

Every member of my family is a warm friend of Mr. Bailey. 

CONTRACT FOR THE BRITISH GOVERNMENT. 

I have had a great many contracts with the British Government. 
Q. Has he assisted you with your contracts with the British 
Government? 

A. I went to him. 



294 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

LETTER FROM NORTH TEXAS BANKER CONCERNING STEGER-BAILEY 
GOVERNMENT MULE CONTRACT. 

Besides numerous verbal reports of similar character, the follow- 
ing letter to the author at Austin, Texas, while the investigation was 
in progress and signed by a banker living in an adjoining county to 
Fannin, of which Bonham is the county seat, is significant: 
"Yours of 30th inst., just received, and in reply v\'Ould say that some 
time during the Spanish-American War, while Steger was buying 
mules and horses for the Gov., I sold some mules to Mr. R. E. 
Steger. At the time, Mr. Steger spoke of one mule that had a slight 
defect, and said that he was afraid the Gov. would knock him out. 
I told him that if he did not go I would take him back. Some time 
after this R. E. Steger wrote me that the Gov. had refused to take 
several, and for me to go up and pick out the mule that I had sold 
him, as he could not remember which one it was. I went to Bonham 
and met Mr. Steger (R. E. Steger), and adjusted the matter and on 
this occasion Mr. R. E. Steger had a great deal to say about their 
stock business with the Gov. He told me what they were getting for 
the mules and horses, and what they had paid for them, and the num- 
ber they had handled, and the profit they had made. I, in response 
to all this, stated that they had made quite a nice little sum. Mr. R. 
E. Steger, said in reply to this that they were out considerable in ex- 
pense, as they had to pay their man for buying, had to feed and take 
care of the stock until received by the Gov., and in addition to this 
that Ed. had to pay J. W. Bailey $5,000 to get this contract. I can 
not remember the date, but Mr. R. T. Steger gave me a check on this 
occasion for the mule, about $70, but as our bank was burned out on 
the 1 2th day of Oct., 1905, and great deal of the bank records, I am 
unable to furnish the date." 

In view of the foregoing testimony, the following finding of the 
majority of the Suppression Committee is laughable as well as 
ridiculous. "We find that there was no evidence offered tending 
to sustain this charge. On the other hand, affirmative evidence was 
offered disproving the same, and we find that said charge is untrue." 

GOVERNMENT CATTLE CONTRACT. 
CHARGE NO. 36. 

Charge number 36 was as follows: "That J. W. Bailey, while a 
Senator from Texas, assisted F. J. Hall in the collection of an ac- 
count against the United States Government for furnishing beef at 
Anadarko, Indian Territory, or Oklahoma, and appeared for the 
said Hall before the department having charge of same at Washing- 
ton, D. C, and for said services received from said Hall a fee, loan 
or gift amounting to a considerable sum of money, the particulars of 
which are well known to the said J . JV . Bailey." 

The witness Bailey (continuing p. 904) — 



r/ic Political Life-Story of a fallen Idol 295 

Q. What about that charge? 

A. That is a lie from the beginning to end, except the statement 
I v/ent to the department in order to expedite the settlement with 
Mr. Hall. Mr. Hall was a neighbor of mine as well as a constit- 
uent, and also a friend. He sold the Government some cattle and 
delivered them. The Government branded them and turned them 
loose on the Indian reservation for the Indians. Instead of paying 
Mr. Hall promptly, as it ought to have been done, it delayed the 
payment, as the Government so frequently does, and Mr. Hall came 
to me and told me he owed the bank, this money and that the bank 
wanted it. He had expected to pay them within a short time after the 
cattle were delivered, and payment had been delayed months, maybe 
three or four months. He asked me to see about it — possibly he 
wrote me before Congress adjourned, I am not sure about it, but I 
know he talked with me about it just before I started to the Demo- 
cratic National Convention in 1896, and while at Chicago I received 
a telegram from him urging me not to forget or neglect seeing the 
department at Washington with respect to this settlement, and I went 
from Chicago to Washington to see about it, and I succeeded in 
having the department to settle it and pay him the money. I came 
on back to Gainesville, and almost by the time I was there, as I re- 
call it, they had sent Mr. Hall his money; and I not only did not re- 
ceive five cents for my services, but I did not allow Mr. Hall to pay 
my expenses. [But he had some "loan" transaction with Hall.] 

The following written information upon which the foregoing 
charge was based was furnished to the writer by Hon. W. O. Davis, 
Ex-State Senator from Bailey's own county. "Soon after Bailey was 
elected to the Senate, F. J. Hall, then of Gainesville, but now Sheriff 
of El Paso, Texas, had an account against the United States Govern- 
ment for furnishing beef at Anadarko, and for some cause payment 
was stopped at Washington. Bailey looked after the matter at Wash- 
ington before the Department, and charged Hall Five Hundred 
Dollars, which Hall paid. Hall is unreliable and his testimony is 
not to be depended upon, but the proof can otherwise be made." 

F. J. HALL TESTIFIES ABOUT BAILEY AND CATTLE CONTRACT IN THE 
INDIAN TERRITORY WITH UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT. 

MR. F. J. HALL 

witness for Mr. Bailey, testified (Bailey Investigation Committee 
Report, pages 161-170), as follows: 

I sold the Government some heifers; sold them about $40,000 
worth of heifers, and they sent a man from Washington down there 
to receive them, and I turned them over to him, and they agreed to 
send me the money in twenty or thirty days, and it lingered along and 
lingered along three or four months, and I wrote to Mr. Bailey up 
there. I think I wrote him and wired him, too; I wished he would 
go around and see if they would not send me the m.oney. They owed 
1-21 



296 Senator J. W . Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

me the money and I had their receipt for the money and they had not 
paid it. And after that I saw Mr. Bailey at Gainesville, and I 
asked him to go around again. They did not pay it at first when he 
saw them, and he said he would speak to them about it again. He 
told me that he went around and spoke to them about it and told 
them they ought to pay it. I think, he went in a short time after I 
spoke to him. 

I did not come here at the request of the committee. I saw [the 
charges] in the paper. I came from El Paso. 

The claim I had before the department was ten to twelve years 
ago. I owed the First National Bank at Gainesville, of which Mr. 
Lacey was president and Mr. Worsham was cashier and Mr. J. W. 
Gladny was bookkeeper. I did not tell both of them that I had to 
pay Senator Bailey $500 — never told them anything about paying or 
promising to pay Senator Bailey anything for that. I do not know 
that I ever made any statement about it at all. I do not say that I 
did not. / do not know that I did not. I do not remember of ever 
talking to them about it. I would not say anything about any con- 
versation about paying Senator Bailey any sum of money out of that, 
because it has been a good while ago. 

I have loaned Senator Bailey money a good while ago. I went 
on his note or something of that kind. He always paid it. I loaned 
him money or went on his note a time or two, which has been a long 
time ago. I could not tell you when. I could not tell you when it 
was I endorsed his note; nor how often. 

Payment [for the heifers from Washington] was not stopped; 
they just did not pay it. They kept saying that they would send it 
but they did not send it. I asked Senator Bailey to go around and 
see them and see if they would not send it. I could not remember 
the dates of my contract nor the dates of these loans. 

It will be observed that this charge was to the efifect that Bailey 
received "from said Hall a fee, loan or gift amounting to a consid- 
erable sum of money." Hall himself, though appearing voluntar- 
ily as Bailey's witness, was forced to admit that they had had 
monetary dealings. But the majority report of the Suppression 
Committee was as follows: "We find that there is no evidence in 
this record, nor was there any offered tending to establish any part 
of this charge, but the same was disproved, therefore find it to be 
untrue." 

BURNETTE-SUGGS CONTROVERSY. 
CHARGE NO. 37. 

Charge number 37 was as follows: "That about the year 1901, 
and while the said Bailey was a Senator from Texas, said Bailey 
representeed one S. B. Burnett of Fort Worth, Texas, in and about 
and concerning the leasing of certain lands in the Kiowa and Co- 
manche Reservations from the Department of the Interior at Wash- 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 297 

ington, and the said Burnett for his said services paid him large sums 
of money as a fee or loan or gift." 

The witness Bailey (continuing p. 904) — "That is a downright 
and positive lie without the semblance of truth in it. The only truth 
or appearance of truth there is in it is that I did prevent the Secretary 
of the Interior from leasing grazing lands in the Indian Territory 
or in Oklahoma, I believe those lands are, to begin on the ist of 
April. They had advertised the leases and they were to begin on the 
ist of April. That meant, Senator Odell, that if the men who 
then occupied those lands with cattle did not become the successful 
bidders for the land they would have to move off by the ist of April, 
and that meant thev would have to begin gathering their cattle by 
the middle of March. * * * j went to the Commissioner of 
Indian Affairs, not only at the request of Mr. Burnett — Mr. Wither- 
spoon, a brother of the member of the Legislature, had cattle in 
there, as I remember it; Mr. Carver at Henrietta, Tom Waggoner, 
and probably half a dozen men, every one of them Texans — so far 
as I know all those who applied to me with respect to the matter were 
Texans — and I went to the Commissioner of Indian Affairs and laid 
the matter before him and he agreed with me. I could not, how- 
ever, of course, get him to withdraw the advertisement. « * * 
And I went then to the Interior Department and laid the matter be- 
fore the Secretary of Interior. * * * The Secretary of the In- 
terior heard me through and did not decide it, but said he would let 
me know the next morning, and I went around there and he said, and 
said it rather grufily, that he had made up his mind to let the adver- 
tisement stand and would not make any change in it, and then I said 
with some emphasis I would see if that could not be changed. He 
asked me if I was going to go to Congress about it. I said no, I could 
do that, but there must be somebody connected with this administra- 
tion with sense enough to know better than to move those cattle in the 
middle of March, and I will go to the President first. I went to the 
President about it, and I had not more than concluded a statement of 
the case to him before he says, "You are right, those cattle ought not 
to be moved at that time of the year, and they will not be moved." 
And the President, among his many other accomplishments, is a 
cowman, and he knew too well to allow them to move or force them 
to move at that time, and the order was issued and the leases were 
advertised again, as I remember it, the 30th of June, or something of 
that kind. 

The information upon which the foregoing charge was based 
was in writing, furnished by Honorable W. O. Davis, of Gaines- 
ville, and was as follows: "During the fall of 1901, a controversy 
arose between S. B. Burnett of Ft. Worth, Texas, and Sugg Bros., of 
Sherwood, Texas, concerning the leasing of some lands from the In- 
terior Department in the Kiowa and Comanche Reservations. 
Each party applied for a lease of the lands. Sugg Brothers are well 
known in Gainesville and had intimate business and personal rela- 



298 Senator J. II'. Bailey of Texas Uninaslccd 

tions with W. H. Dougherty of Gainesville, a zealous partisan of 
Bailey. Senator Bailey appeared before the Department and rep- 
resented Burnett. The matter was one of much importance, and 
Burnett evidently paid him a fee for his services. E. C. Sugg is dead, 
but J. D. Sugg, the other partner is now living at Sherwood, Irion 
County, Texas." 

While the investigation was in progress the writer received a let- 
ter from a trustworthy citizen of Fort Worth giving the names of 
witnesses who could probably testify as to the alleged fact that Bur- 
nett and his associates paid Bailey as much as $5,000 for represent- 
ing them against the Sugg brothers in this matter. In the hurry and 
confusion of the investigation, however, the letter was lost. Before 
it was lost, however, the author, at one time ofifered to show the letter 
to a sub-committee as an evidence of his own good faith. It was 
along about this time that Odell tried to get the committee to force 
the proponent of the charges to turn over every scrap of his personal 
and confidential correspondence in connection with this controversy. 
In other words, he insisted on the violation of every confidence 
known to the rules of private correspondence, but when notified to 
produce papers of his own client, Bailey, bearing upon the contro- 
versy, he refused to do so. 

BAILEY FIGURES IN INDIAN TERRITORY LAND LEASES. 
S. B. BURNETT 

was called in by the Committee before the prosecutor was ready to 
use him and being examined by Mr. Wolfe testified (Bailey Investi- 
gation Committee, 1907, pages 285-290), in part as follows: 

I live in Ft. Worth. I have been a personal friend of Mr. Bailey 
for several years. I had a little dealings with him; yes, sir. I had 
a little trouble with Sugg Brothers over some leases up there in the 
Indian Territory in the Kiowa and Comanche Reservation. I had 
leased big tracts of land from them. [That is from the Reservation 
Commissioner.] I had at one time 332,000 acres. At the time 
I had this difference with Sugg Brothers it was about 200,000 acres. 
There were 480,000 acres of country set aside up there to hold 
cattle on, when the country was opened up for settlement. [Mr. 
Odell : "I suggest it might take quite a while to try the case of Bur- 
nett vs. Suggs Bros., or vice versa." Of course, Odell, Bailey & 
Company were in a hurry. Perhaps Bailey's oil business required 
attention and possibly Odell was anxious to make that trip to New 
York, which he afterwards made with Bailey. As to whether or not 
he secured a loan from Henry Clay while they were hobnobbing at 
the Waldorf Astoria is unknown.] 

I think the 480,000 acres of land were set aside about four years 
ago this last spring. It was right down on the front of Red River, 
across the river from my ranch and the ranch of W. T. Waggoner, 
my ranch being in Wichita county. This land covered the original 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 299 

land I had leased and it went down on to Suggs' just a little space. 
I suppose there was about 20,000 acres down on the east end of the 
Suggs' original pasture. We had both been leasing a long time and 
Suggs went up to the Agency and represented to the Commissioner 
of Indian Affairs, Mr. Jones, that he had 25,000 cattle down there 
and that I had a large track, of land and few cattle, while it turned 
out to be just the other way. I went up to the Agency to see about 
it and he said he had made up his mind to give Suggs 100,000 acres 
of my country. I told him. Colonel Randlett, of the Interior De- 
partment, who was down at Anardarko, I would not stand for it. 

So I went on to Washington City. When I got there I found out 
what Suggs had represented. So I went and hunted up Senator 
Bailey and I took him up, and went up and Commissioner Jones 
explained it to him, and Senator Bailey said, it was not right; he 
knew Suggs and lived in his town, and he knew me. So the Com- 
missioner said he could not do anything but he agreed with Senator 
Bailey that I was right about it. So we went over to see Secretary 
Hitchcock, Senator Bailey and I. We sat down there and talked 
with the Secretary about it, and, well, he said he did not like to in- 
terfere down there, something to that amount, and did not want to 
say whether he would do anything or would not do anything. So 
Senator Bailey just got up and told him — he said: "You take that 
country away from Burnett and I will see whether you damned Re- 
publicans up here can rob a Democrat." He says, "I will take it 
up in the Senate before you can do it. I know them both — Burnett 
and Suggs." And so that was the end of it and I went back home. 
Suggs was a Republican. Senator Bailey never represented Suggs 
that I know of. 

I kept my 100,000 acres of land. I never loaned him a dollar. 
I endorsed a note for him once, but he did not know — I do not think 
he did — that I did that. [Then why did he do it?] I was in the 
E.xchange Bank at Dallas one time [wonder what time], and Ferris 
said something about some money that Senator Bailey owed him, and 
he said he thought he would want to renew it. I told him it was 
good, I would endorse it for him if he wanted me to. I think he is 
plumb good and I will pay it if he don't." 

I never heard of Suggs Brothers trying to beat me to Senator 
Bailey over this lease contract. 

Yes, I knew Congressman Stevens from that district. I think 
there was a bill introduced in the Lower House afifecting the Kiowa 
and Comanche Reservation but I do not remember who introduced 
it. At one time the cattle men had 1,300,000 acres of that land 
leased and I think about 500,000 acres were set aside for the use of 
the Indians as pasturage. I do not know about the Stephens' bill 
providing that 500,000 acres should be set aside up in Wichita 
Mountains, forty miles above my ranch instead of across tiie river 
from my ranch. I could not say about that, I do not remember. It 
is not true that I and others got Senator Bailey to so manipulate that 



300 Senator J. \V . Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

legislation as to throw that reservation right across the river from my 
ranch and that of Mr. Waggoner. That was done, you know, in 
Washington and I was not there and I do not know anything about 
it. / had nothing to do with that part of the game. 

Q. You left that to your Washington representative, I sup- 
pose? 

A. I did not have anything to do with it. I had nothing to do 
with that. 

Senator Bailey [rising] : Mr. Chairman, I am not going to sit 
here and be insulted this way. 

Chairman: Just sit down and keep quiet now. It is better for 
you and better for all of us. [This was one of the times that Mr. 
Bailey grew extremely angry and ferocious; so much so, in fact, as to 
threaten a scene before the Committee. If there was no basis for this 
question and this inquiry, why should he have lost his temper? It 
will be remembered that he never permitted, and the Committee 
would not require him, to submit to a cross-examination on all these 
matters, either by the proponent of the charges or his attorneys, al- 
though the Committee and Mr. Bailey's lawyers promised, when they 
refused to let him take the stand at the beginning of the investigation, 
that he would submit to a cross-examination before the investigation 
was closed.] 

It would seem from Mr. Bailey's own testimony that the "fee, loan 
or gift" alleged in this charge should have read "endorsement," con- 
sequently the Suppression Committee found the charge untrue and 
that is similar to the reasoning which says the dead man was not 
killed with a pistol but with the bullet. 

SUGG BROTHERS AND THE INDIAN TERRITORY LAND LEASES. 
CHARGE NO. 38. 

Charge No. 38 was as follows: "That about the year 1900, said 
J. W. Bailey represented Sugg Brothers, a firm composed of J. D. 
Sugg and E. C. Sugg, now deceased, before the Department of the 
Interior, in reference to the approval of leases for some Kiowa and 
Comanche lands which said Sugg Brothers were endeavoring to 
lease, and for such services said Sugg Brothers, or one of them, paid 
to said Bailey large sums of money by way of fees, loans or gifts." 

The witness Bailey (continuing p. 905) — that is an unadulterated 
lie. I never had any business transaction with the Suggs in my life. 
1 knew Cal Sugg well, and I knew that he had some lands under lease 
in the Indian Territory. The fact of it is he was very much at Gaines- 
ville. * * * That statement he had ever employed me is a down- 
right and positive lie, and the statement he ever paid me five 
cents is a downright and positive lie. I never had but one business 
transaction with Mr. Sugg in my life. That involved probably four 
hundred and fifty or five hundred dollars. I swapped a couple of 
yearling colts once for some yearling steers, and the man with whom I 



The Political Life-Story of .i Fallen Idol 301 

traded was to ship — I sold the steers to Sugg and the man with whom 
I traded was to send the steers to Sugg's ranch, to ship them there 
direct instead of shipping them to me. They were not to be deliv- 
ered at that time, some different time of the year they wanted to be 
shipped, and when the time did come the man didn't keep his trade; 
he didn't take his colts nor deliver his cattle, and I returned Mr. Sugg 
ihe money. Now, the cattle that I was to receive was for two yearl- 
ing colts. I know that they were worth somewhere between two and 
three hundred dollars, probably in the trade I charged him $300 for 
them and I took steers in payment. That trade failed, and when it 
failed and the cattle were not shipped to Mr. Sugg, I afterwards re- 
turned him the money he had paid me, and that was the only transac- 
tion I ever had with him in my life, and the only dollar that ever 
passed between him and me in my life, or in his life. 

It will be observed that Bailey starts out by swearing: "That is 
an unadulterated lie; I never had any business transaction with Sugg 
in my life," and afterwards winds up his testimony saying: "I never 
had but one business transaction with Mr. Sugg in my life, * * * 
I swapped a couple of yearling colts once for some yearling steers 
* * *" etc., ad infinitum. Bailey always conjured up a horse or 
a cattle trade or a loan or endorsement to explain his shady transac- 
tions. 

The information upon which this charge was based was in writing, 
furnished the proponent of the charges by Honorable W. O. Davis, 
and was as follows: "Some time previous to this, there was some 
delay in the Interior Department in reference to the approval of the 
leases for some Kiowa and Comanche lands to Sugg Brothers for 
grazing purposes. Sugg Brothers had Bailey to intercede with the 
Interior Department, and the leases were approved. E. C. Sugg 
of the firm was in Gaineseville at the time, and the story goes, that he 
went to Clem Henniger, a tailor, and told him that when Bailey came 
home to make him the best suit of clothes in his shop. As Sugg left 
the shop, a Bank collector met him with a draft for Fourteen Hun- 
dred Dollars drawn on him by Bailey. Sugg paid the draft, but can- 
celled the order for the suit of clothes." 

In this connection the following letter, dated El Paso, Te.xas, Jan- 
uary 26, 1907, addressed to the proponent of the charges by a relia- 
ble citizen of that city is quite interesting: "Among the charges you 
have filed against Mr. Bailey I note one relative to money obtained 
from J. D. and E. C. Sugg. While a resident of San Angelo last 
fall, where J. D. Sugg resides, I was told by Mr. C. E. Hudson, a 
j-irominent merchant of that city, and a man of undoubted veracity, 
that before his death Cal Sugg related to him the details of the mat- 
ter in which Bailey assisted him and that pending the negotiations 
for the lease of the Territory lands Bailey borrowed a large sum of 
money from Sugg giving him a mortgage on cattle represented to be 
located in the territory, that when the note fell due Sugg made an in- 
vestigation and found that Bailey had no cattle nor had ever had any 



302 Senator J. ll\ Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

in Indian Territory. He came to the conclusion that this was the 
method used to collect a fee for the services rendered and made no 
further efifort to collect. I would respectfully suggest that both J. D. 
Sugg and C. E. Hudson, of San Angelo be summoned to testify as to 
this charge, as they can undoubtedly corroborate it as true. It is 
very apparent that Bailey's friends are attempting to foist a colossal 
whitewash upon the people, and unless those favoring the develop- 
ment of the whole truth exercise unceasing vigilance they will suc- 
ceed. Gen. Crane or Senator Skinner willVell who and what I am." 

Although the proponent of the charges asked that Mr. Hudson, 
and other prominent citizens of San Angelo be allowed to testify as 
to Cal Sugg's statement to them during his lifetime as to large sums 
of money paid to Bailey for practicing before the Interior Depart- 
ment, that request was refused. Mr. J. D. Sugg was summoned by 
the proponent of the charges but was sick at the time and could not 
come. Afterwards the proponent of the charges visited San Angelo 
and talked with him and while he was very loath to talk about the 
matter, in that it involved the participation by his deceased brother in 
this transaction, nevertheless he did adm.it to the author that Bailey 
did discharge a part, at least, of is indebtedness to the Sugg Brothers 
by "introducing" Cal Sugg to the heads of the Departments at Wash- 
ington. 

In this connection the proponent of the charges received a letter, 
dated San Angelo, Texas, February 26, 1907, from a prominent, 
well-to-do and absolutely reliable stockman and banker of that section, 
which is in part as follows: "I have heard Mr. J. D. Sugg make the 
statement that he and his brother Cal in looking over their papers 
found a $7,000.00 note of Senator Bailey's, and that he suggested that 
Bailey was able to pay it and they ought to collect it, but his brother 
said, 'No, Bailey had done some work for them up yonder (meaning 
Washington) and that Bailey had never charged them anything for 
it, so they would burn up the note.' This was not told me confiden- 
tially, but stated before a crowd." 

BAILEY BORROWS FROM RAILROAD PRESIDENT WHO SEEKS FAVORS FROM 

CONGRESS. 

CHARGE NO. 39. 

Charge Number 39 was as follows: "That about the year 189 — 
Judge J. M. Lindsay, of Gainesville, Texas, was interested in a rail- 
road enterprise known as the Gainesville, McAlester & St. Louis 
Railway Company, and it was necessary for said railroad company 
to obtain congressional authority for the right to construct through 
the Indian Territory, and it also desired to obtain from Congress an 
extension of the time in which to complete same. While said J. M. 
Lindsay was working in Washington, D. C, to procure said rights 
and looking after the interest of said enterprise and seeking said leg- 
islation at the hands of Congress, and while J. W. Bailey, as a mem- 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 303 

ber of Congress, was assisting in procuring said legislation, said 
J. W. Bailey knowing the interest of said Lindsay in the enterprise, 
took, advantage of the situation and procured a loan from said Lind- 
say of $2,000, said Lindsay at that time not being in business of money 
lending, but being a heavy borrower of money, as was well known to 
said Bailey. Upon being called upon to repay said sum of money, 
which was evidenced by a note, said Bailey was indignant and repaid 
same under protest, thus evidencing the fact that he had regarded 
the advancement of said money as a gift or compensation rather than 
a loan to be repaid." 

The witness Bailey (continuing p. 906) — 

Q. What have you to say about that? 

A. That is another downright and positive lie, and it is marvel- 
ous to me who could invent that. Nothing of the kind ever happened 
nor anything that could have been drafted into it. The fact of it is I 
did not owe $2,000 to Judge Lindsay. I doubt if I ever owed his bank, 
because while he was connected with the old Gainesville National 
Bank, was at one time president of it, and is now president of the 
Lindsay National Bank, I doubt if I ever owed either of them exactly 
$2,000 in my life, though I may have done it. * * * I took great 
pleasure in doing what I could, first to pass the original bill through 
Congress permitting the construction of it, and afterwards for two or 
three times to extend the time. I did with that bill what I had never 
seen done before in Congress, and I have never seen it done since, I 
passed that bill and the House took my word for the contents of it, 
and passed it without having it read. I never saw it done before or 
since. [So we have it once more from Mr. Bailey's own testimony, 
that he is a very remarkable man.] * * * 

He [Lindsay] was formerly district judge there, he is a leading 
business man, a member of the Baptist church and is as highgrade a 
man as there is in Texas, and it is infamous that a man of that kind 
should be — and who has no interest in the politics of the State except 
as any other citizen may have — that he should be drawn up before the 
world and accused as a man who contrives to corrupt or attempts to 
corrupt a public servant. [This charge was not directed at Judge 
Lindsay but is simply to the effect that Bailey "took advantage of the 
situation and procured a loan from said Lindsay; * * * that 
upon being called upon to repay said sum of money * * * said 
Bailey was indignant and paid same under protest, thus evidencing 
the fact that he (Bailey) had regarded the advancement of said money 
as a gift or compensation rather than a loan to be repaid." Judge 
Lindsay's motive may have been of the best while Bailey's may have 
been of the worst.] 

The written information upon whicli the foregoing charge was 
based was furnished the writer by Hon. W. O. Davis of Mr. Bailey's 
home city and was as follows: "Judge J. ^L Lindsay, as were the 
citizens of Gainesville in general, was interested in a railroad enter- 
prise, known as the Gainesville, McAlester & St. Louis Ry. Co. It 



304 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

was necessary to obtain congressional authority for the right to build, 
and also to obtain an extension of time. Judge Lindsay, while Mr. 
Bailey was a member of Congress, went to Washington and remained 
quite awhile, looking after the interests of the enterprise and seeking 
)hc necessary legislation. Judge Lindsay at that time was not loaning 
I'-ioney, but was a heavy borrower. Mr. Bailev took advantage of the 
situation and obtained Two Thousand Dollars from Judge Lindsay, 
but Judge Lindsay took his note for the money and afterwards made 
Bailey pay it, but over Bailey's indignant protest. Judge Lindsay, 
strange to say, is now posing as a supporter of Bailey. 

J. M. LINDSAY, PRESIDENT GAINESVILLE, McALESTER & ST. LOUIS RAIL- 
WAY COMPANY, TESTIFIES ABOUT LOANS AND ENDORSE- 
MENTS TO BAILEY. 

Mr. J. M. Lindsay, a voluntary witness for Mr. Bailey and a very 
partisan one who like John D. Johnson and others, had a poor mem- 
ory, but was forced nevertheless to testify (Bailey Invest. Com. Re- 
port, 1907, page 409-413) in part as follows: 

About the year 1893 I ^'^''^s interested (as president) in a railroad 
enterprise known as the Gainesville, McAlester & St. Louis Rail- 
way Company, and it became necessary to obtain congressional 
authority for the right to construct throueh the Indian Territory and 
to obtain an extension of time in which to complete the enterprise. 
That was about the winter of 1892 or 1893. Senator Bailey [then 
Congressman Bailey! introduced the bill and had it passed. 

I don't think he had much means or much money at that time. I 
don't remember ever to have loaned him any money in Washington 
City. Yes, sir, I endorsed a note for Senator Bailey at one time, I 
think it was along about 1891;. 

It became necessary to extend the original charter or franchise 
within about three years; in 1896. Yes, sir, I was in Washington in 
1898-99, anticipating there would be a necessity for another exten- 
sion, and Senator Bailey had a bill passed extending it three years 
from 1899. 

It was at no bank at all that I endorsed the $1,000 note. It was 
Captain Daugherty, F. M. Daugherty, and all the citizens of Gaines- 
ville. [This shows very conclusively that Mr. Bailey was in sore 
Straits prior to the time he met "My dear Pierce."] That was about 
1895. Well, they hadn't — the road hadn't been constructed, no. The 
bulk of the note, as I remember it, was paid by Mr. Bailey by war- 
rants drawn on the seargent-at-arms. There was a small portion of 
it 1 recollect I paid and carried for a time. [Ex-Senator W. O. Davis 
is the authority for the statement that it was a notorious fact that 
when Judge Lindsay required Mr. Bailey to pay back these loans, 
Bailey became very indignant at the imposition, taking the position 
subrosa, at least, that he had earned this money. It is due Mr. Bailey 
to say that Judge Lindsay denied this. Lindsay, however, impressed 
the author as a very secretive and unreliable witness.] 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 305 

Yes, sir, I have been a right active supporter of Mr. Bailey in this 
matter. [He was on the platform at the Houston debate.] 1 have 
been in full sympathy with Mr. Bailey on this issue because I felt 
absolutely sure he was right and being persecuted, viciously perse- 
cuted. [What a pity!] 

BAILEY IN IMPECUNIOUS CIRCUMSTANCES BEFORE ENTERING THE 

SENATE. 

I was president of the corporation. I could not approximate the 
numbers, the dates, and amounts of the respective loans made him 
from 1 893- 1 899. I don't think he was the owner of much means at 
that time. I could not say as a matter of fact whether he was insol- 
vent or not. I don't know about his having settled any debt at less 
than dollar for dollar. As to his dealings with other people and his 
conditions personally, I didn't know anything about it. I don't know 
anything about his having settled part of his debts in Cooke county 
for thirty cents on the dollar. 

Mr. Odell— Wait a minute, Mr. Lindsay. This witness has al- 
ready stated he knew nothing about the debts Senator Bailey had. I 
want this record to show, after he was answered, he deliberately asks 
if he knew anything about his settling debts at thirty cents on the dol- 
lar. I want it stricken out, and want it to state he had no proof. 

The Chairman — I think it is irrelevant testimony, and I will pro- 
tect you gentlemen. The witness stated fully he knew nothing about it. 

Mr. Cocke — Will you permit me to make a statement? 

The Chairman — If you desire to make a statement you can do so. 

Mr. Cocke — I want to state what I conceive to be a proper subject 
of inquiry, the fact as to the utter insolvency at the time Mr. Bailey 
went into the Senate, and I expect to prove that Mr. Bailey atthis 
time has property in Cooke county, if the Committee will permit it, 
exceeding in value two hundred thousand dollars. 

The Chairman — Can you prove that by this witness? 

Mr. Cocke — I don't know, sir, I was told I could. I was told by a 
reputable citizen of Gainesville. I am asking what he knows of his 
property now. 

Kir. Odell — That wasn't the objection. The question you asked 
him, if he knew anything about his being insolvent and settling his 
debts, and he stated he did not. 

BAILEY GROWS RICH IN THE SENATE. 

The witness Lindsay: 

I know that he has several store-houses and some land north of 
Gaineseville. 

Yes, sir, I know about his ownership of the D. T. Lacy 
building on the north side of California Street, according 

to the prints $o,i;oo 

Acquired in 1906. 



306 Senator J. 11'. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

I understand that he owns the R. S. Rose building on 
the north side of California Street, acquired a few months 
ago $7,000 

I saw it stated that he owend the Pierre Davis building 
on California Street $4,000 

I understand also that he bought the Potter building on 
the north side of California Street, last year $8,500 

I understood that he bought two buildings on the south 
side (Lassita building) a few months ago, at $10,000 

Yes, sir; I understand he owns the Red River National 
Bank building, bought two or three years ago, 1904 $6,000 

Yes, sir; I understood that he bought the Bowmcr 
property on California Street. However, I don't know the 
price [$3>5oo] 

I know about the lot back of his residence on Davis 
Street $7,000 

I don't know about his ownership of the 1,000 acres at 
$50.00 per acre, but he has a block of land north of Gaines- 
ville a mile and a half [$50,000] 

He has some barns on it. Land in that neighborhood is 
worth $40.00 to $50.00. 

I don't know anything about a loan made to Wheeler & 
James of forty thousand dollars [$40,000] 

I understand he made a loan to Pierre Davis on the 
Lindsay National Bank building at $2,000 $2,000 

I do not know anything about a loan to W. W. Howard [$4,000] 

[Real property purchased in and near Lexington, Ky., 
since March ist, 1902, less sales, as per exhibit herein- 
after set out $1 25,000] 

BAILEY DEBAUCHES SOUTHERN STANDARDS OF STATESMAxNSHIP AT 
CLEBURNE, TEXAS, OCTOBER 1 5, 1906. 

(Galveston News, Oct. 16, 1906.) 

This celebrated egomaniac gave expression to the following re- 
markable language : "In all the long and glorious history of our own 
and of other Southern States, there never lived and served a man 
whose record is as much above suspicion of unselfish men as mine; 
* * * They have never been able to discover even one mistake. 
Is it not marvelous that in a State like ours a man whose record is as 
stainless as mine has always been, can be pursued as they have pursued 
^(,p * * * ]\iy name is indissolubly connected with the name 
of the State of Texas." 

Apologizing for the profanation, by comparison of Bailey with 
our revered Southern dead, let us nevertheless draw some useful les- 
sons by said comparison. 

Mr. Bailey's salary has been since he entered the Senate until the 
year 1908, $5,000 — where did he get the above listed property? To the 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 307 

Investigation Committee of 1901 he said: "Knowing that, as an 
honest man, I could make nothing in the public service, my only hope 
of a modest competence to protect me against an old age of poverty 
and want is that I could find some transaction like this, and by careful 
management save something out of it." "The empty meal barrel" 
about which Bailey spoke in his campaign against Chilton, seems to 
have become comfortably filled, at the loss, however, of the confidence 
and esteem and admiration of the people. The scorn with which 
John C. Calhoun declined a needed loan, because he suspected the 
motives of the would be lenders, or desired to avoid even the appear- 
ance of evil, is in marked contrast to Mr. Bailey's attitude and con- 
duct. 

Let us recall also the splendid dignity and manly independence 
of Robert E. Lee who, broken by the fortunes of war, with the hopes 
of the future all but blasted, declined to accept the presidency, shortly 
after the Civil War had closed, of a Life Insurance Company at a 
salary of $30,000 per annum, because Lee thought too highly of his 
untarnished name to sell its influence, although at that time he held 
no public office and owed to the people as a private citizen only the 
lofty duty of heroic self-sacrifice that no shadow should pass across 
the pathway of a man that the Southern people loved so well. 

In this connection we should, in these times of greed and graft, 
all remember the language of Thomas Jefferson, the immortal foun- 
der of Democracy, when he said: "Never will I engage, while in 
public office, in any kind of enterprise for the improvement of my 
fortune, nor wear any other character than that of a farmer." 

The man who enters or remains in the public service, expecting 
to become rich, had better, perhaps, never been born. Such expecta- 
tion will either be disappointed, or gratified, if at all, at the expense 
of the people. A man in public life, or occupying a trust relation in 
private life, has a right, nay even it is his duty, to suspect the good 
faith of any proposed employment, favor or compensation, coming 
from those who seek or who are in a position to profit by his official 
conduct. Honest people make no such advances. This is fundamen- 
tal, and, although it may be homely honesty, it is honesty just the same. 
It will not do for the public official to say that he is above the lusts, 
the avarice, and the temptations, of his fellow men. In so saying he 
does himself an injustice, no less than the people he thus misrepre- 
sents. 

CHARGE NO. 40. 

Charge Number 40 was as follows: "That in the spring of 1893 
Hon. C. B. Stuart, of Gainesville, Texas, a former law partner of said 
J. W. Bailey, was appointed a judge of the United States Court for 
the Indian Territory, and appointed J. W. Phillips, of Gainesville, 
Texas, to whom Bailey owed considerable sums of money, as clerk 
of said court; that the compensation of said Phillips as clerk was on a 
salary basis, under the law as it then existed. Said J. W. Bailey, at 



308 Senator J. II''.' Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

said time, being a member of the Judiciary Committee of the House 
of Representatives of the United States Congress, procured the pas- 
sage of an act, that was approved November 3, 1893, U. S. Statutes 
at Large, Vol. 28, which put said clerkship on a fee basis and increased 
the compensation of the office of the clerk to the sum of, to wit, about 
twenty-hve thousand dollars per year, and thereafter, during the life- 
time of said Phillips, now deceased, and during the incumbency of 
said office, said Bailey procured large sums of money from time to 
time from said Phillips as compensation, gifts or loans in return for 
his said services in the premises aforesaid." 

The information upon which the above charge was based was fur- 
nished the proponent of the charges, in writing, by Senator Davis of 
Gainesville, Texas, and was as follows: "In the spring of 1893, in 
the beginning of Cleveland's second term, C. B. Stuart of Gainesville, 
the former law partner of Bailey, was appointed Judge of the United 
States Court for the Indian Territory. Stuart now resides at South 
McAlester. Stuart appointed J. W. Phillips of Gainesville, Texas, 
Clerk of said Court. Phillips was a supporter of Bailey. Bailey 
owed Phillips considerable money. Phillips' salary as Clerk at the 
time of his appointment was the same as that of an ordinary United 
States Circuit Court Clerk. Bailey was a member of the Judiciary 
Committee of the House, and he procured the passage of the act that 
was approved November 3, 1893, United States Statutes at large, 
Volume 28, page 9, which increased the compensation of the Clerk to 
about Twenty-Five Thousand per annum, making it one of the best 
paying offices in the Government. It will be seen from U. S. Statutes 
at large, Volume 28, page 691;, that someone has closely watched after 
the interests of this Clerk. Now it is generally understood that dur- 
ing Phillips' incumbency of the office, Bailey drew on him from time 
to time. C. B. Stuart was on intimate terms with Phillips and doubt- 
less could tell much about this. The above charge and the following 
one will be considered together. (See p. 313.) 

HON. W. 0. DAVIS, EX-STATE SENATOR FROM GAINESVILLE, BAILEY'S 
HOME, TESTIFIES. 

Hon. W. O. Davis, a witness for the complainant, testified (Bailey 
Invest. Com. Report, 1907, p. 509-514) as follows: 

I have lived in Gainesville since July, 1870, and have known Mr. 
Bailey since his residence here. I knew Mr. Phillips quite well while 
he was clerk of the court. About all I knew of the monetary dealings 
between Mr. Bailey and Mr. Phillips, that is my own personal knowl- 
edge, is this: In the spring of 1894, Davis & Garnett had a vendor's 
lien note against Mr. Bailey. It was turned over to us by J. W. Dow- 
ner. The note was past due for a thousand dollars. I wrote Mr. 
Bailey at Washington about it. He did not answer. On the 28th of 
May I filed suit on the note. Along about the first of September, 
J. W. Phillips came up into the office to see me about it. J. W. Phil- 
lips was the clerk at that time of the Federal District in the Indian 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 309 

Territory. He said he wanted to pay Mr. Bailey qui of debt and 
talked to me about the matter. On the 4th of September Mr. Phillips 
paid me the amount due on the note — gave me a check for it. C. B. 
Stuart, Mr. Bailey's ex-partner, appointed him clerk. I know from 
the public prints the part Mr. Bailey took in the legislation which 
created the office and fixed the salary. Mr. Bailey was a member of 
the Judiciary Committee of the House. The office was worth at first 
what the ordinary United States Circuit Clerk's office is worth — a 
salary of $3,500, and all above that went to the government * * * 
a bill was passed giving him these fees in addition. That was while 
Mr. Bailey was a member of the Judiciary Committee. That made 
the office worth about $2).000. 

Q. Had vou seen at that time these supplemental charges down 
here filed by Cocke? 

A. I saw what was published in the paper. 

Q. Yes, sir; did you prepare any of them? 

A. No; I didn't prepare any of them. 

Q. Did you go over them before they were filed? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Did you ever see them before they were filed? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Did you write any letters about them before they were filed? 

A. I expect I furnished Mr. Cocke the data upon which some 
of them were based. 

Q. I thought so — 

A. But they are not in the language in which I furnished it, and 
I never have seen Mr. Cocke ; I never knew Mr. Cocke at all ; I never 
saw him to know him until I saw him here. 

On the Hall charge Hon. W. O. Davis of Gainesville, Texas, tes- 
tified or rather was not permitted to testify (Committee Report p. 
510) as follows: 

There was F. J. Hall and Buck Sparks and John W. Little, was 
my understanding, had a contract to furnish some heifers to the United 
States government. The First National Bank furnished the money 
to buy the heifers. I know this, that there was some delay about col- 
lecting the receipts for the cattle. All I know about Mr. Hall's em- 
ployment of Mr. Bailey was the general talk and what Mr. Lacey, the 
president of the bank, told me about that. Mr. Lacy told me at that 
time — 

Mr. Odell — We object to what Lacy told him, your honor. 

The Chairman — That will be excluded as heresay. 

John W. Little lives at Chickasha, and my information is that 
after the money came — 

Mr. Odell — We object to what his information was. 

[Mr. Davis' information, and there is no doubt in the author's 
mind but what it was absolutely correct, was to the effect that Hall 
paid Bailey $500.00 for his work before the Department in getting 
the Government to make payment to Hall for the heifers.] 



310 Senator J. W. Dailcy o[ Texas Unmasked 

BAILEV INSOLVENT UNTIL 1 899, BUT INDEPENDENT NOW. 

Ex-State Senator W. O. Davis, of Gainesville, Texas, testified 
(pp. 510-513) as follows: 

In 1895 ^Ii"- Bailey was insolvent, as far as I could judge. I had 
some judgments against him for clients and I could not find anything. 
I had execution issued. In 1896 and 1897 he was still insolvent. In 
1899 he was. I say it because I had some judgments against him; I 
had the judgments against him in 1899, for A. A. Green, of Dallas, 
Texas, amounting to $3,710. He got $1,500. 

The Chairman — You don't know? 

A. No, sir; nothing except what Mr. Green told me. 

Mr. Odell — We ask that that be stricken out. 

Mr. Chairman — Mr. Clerk, if you have got that last remark, cut 
it out of the record. 

Mr. Cocke — Has he cut out anything that Mr. Green said? 

The Chairman — He stated what he understood from Mr. Green. 
[The proponent of the charges afterwards brought Mr. Green, a rep- 
utable business man of Dallas, before the Committee and had him in 
the room present and the Committee refused to allow him to testify. 
They would not allow Davis to testify to what Green had told him and 
would not allow Green to testify to the facts of his own personal 
knowledge and such is the way of the whitewashers.] 

The witness — Yes, sir; R. F. Scott had judgments against Mr. 
Bailey and Mr. Bailey paid them about three years ago; about the 
time he began to buy property there, in IQOJ. 

I expect I can give a list of his property there situated in Gaines- 
ville, for I see it every day nearly: 

D. T. Lacy building, bought in 1905, $8,500 

A. S. Rose building, bought in 1906, 7i500 

Pierre-Davis building, bought in 1906, 4,000 

F. A. Tyler building, bought in 1905, 10,000 

F. A. Potter building, bought in 1907, 8,500 

Lassita building, bought in 1906, 10,000 

Red River National Bank building, bought in 1904 6,500 

Bowmer property, bought in 1906, 3,500 

Lot on Denver Street, bought 1907, 2,500 

Ed Bowmer property, Davidson and Dodson Streets 7,000 

Chapman Place, 2,000 acres at $60, 120,000 

1,000 acres, sundry, 60,000 

Whitley & Jones loan, 40,000 

Loan against Lindsay National Bank (about) 15,000 

Total Cooke County Property $285,000 



The Polilical Life-Story of a fallen Idol 311 

Kentucky real estate and horse;;, (purchased since Marcli, 
1902, as per list hereinafter set out under Standard 
Oil Exhibits, $184,251.18 

Gibbs Dallas County Ranch, unsold portion, 50,000.00 

Stock in Ft. Worth Record (Editor Ousley Refused to 
testify as to who owned the balance — perhaps Standard 
Oil ? ) 1 0,000.00 

Prospective fee on sale of Tennessee Railway properties, 
estimated, (Bailey refused to testify how much this fee 
was to be, saying it was no business of the people of 
Texas) 500,000.00 

Grand total of visible property, accumulated in first six 
years of his Senatorship, $1,029,251.18 

And yet four out of seven of the fF/ntewasfi Committee found 
their Master guiltless of the charge of having been insolvent when 
he entered the Senate and of liaving grown rich therein! 

After Hon. W. O. Davis had concluded his testimony before the 
Committee he visited Ardmore in connection with Phillips' fee mat- 
ter and upon his return from there, furnished the proponent of the 
charges the following memorandum of facts: "While Phillips was 
Clerk, he kept his account with the City National Bank of Ardmore, 
of which Don Lacy was then Cashier, but is now President. Bailey 
drew drafts with considerable regularity upon Phillips, and these 
drafts came through the City National Bank and were collected by 
the Bank. When Phillips died, he had a box or drawer in the Bank 
containing his papers, and the oflicers of the Bank went through the 
papers with the widow. There were among the papers quite a num- 
ber of drafts drawn by Bailey on Phillips, stamped paid, and also sev- 
eral notes from Bailey to Phillips. These papers are not now in the 
Bank, but are probably in the possession of the widow, Mrs. J. W. 
Phillips, who lives at Oklahoma City. The officers of the Bank are 
perfectly reliable, and can be depended upon to testify to the truth. 
The Andersons are officers of the First National Bank of Ardmore. 
Phillips did not keep his account there, and they do not know a great 
deal in reference to his business." 

In transmitting this statement of facts Senator Davis took occa- 
sion to write the author as follows, under date of February 13, 1907; 
"In order that you may fully understand the J. W. Phillips matter 
the law increasing his fee, was approved November 3, 1893, U. S. 
Statutes at large, volume 28, page 9. The entire Indian Territory at 
that time constituted one District, and C. B. Stuart was Judge and 
J. W. Phillips, Clerk. On the ist of March, 1895, the Indian Terri- 
tory was divided into three Districts, the Northern, Central and 
Southern, U. S. Statutes at large, volume 28, page 693. The second 
section, page 695, provides that the then Clerk, who was J. W. Phil- 
lips, should be Clerk for the Southern District, and the same act pro- 
vided that the then Judge, who was C. B. Stuart, would be Judge of 

1-22 



312 Senator J. W. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

the Central District. It will be seen that Phillips was legislated upon 
the Judge of the second District, and Stuart was allowed to appoint a 
new Clerk for the Central District. 

"As I have before explained to you, J. W. Phillips, while Clerk, 
kept his account with the City National Bank of Ardmore, and the 
officers of that Bank and Mrs. J. W. Phillips, who now lives at Okla- 
homa City, are about the only persons I know of who could furnish 
evidence of much value. There are other witnesses who ought to 
know, but they cannot be depended upon. The situation is about this, 
as you doubtless fully realize: J. W. Bailey is an arrogant, vindic- 
tive political boss, with some unscrupulous followers, who will not 
only excuse anything he may do, but will lie for him and do his bid- 
ding. It requires men of more than the average courage and convic- 
tions of duty to speak out and voluntarily tell what they know. 

"The methods pursued by the Committee have a tendency to sup- 
press the truth. Bailey and his followers are given a chance to run 
the witnesses down and corrupt, intimidate or browbeat them. 

"Don Lacy is a reliable man and will testify as I wrote you. I see, 
however, from today's Dallas News that the Bailey crowd has been 
rounding him up." 

Bailey's four members of the Committee reported on charge No. 
40 as follows : "We find, and the Committee regards, this charge as 
immaterial and make no findings thereon." In other words, it made 
no difference to the majority of that Committee whether Bailey had 
been grafting in the Indian Territory or not. The fact that they de- 
clined to say the charge was not true, ought to convince even Bailey 
partisans that the facts alleged were true. 

INDIAN TERRITORY CATTLE RESERVATION. 
CHARGE NO. 41. 

Charge number 41 was as follows: "That during the year 1903 
certain stockmen who were leasing lands in the Kiowa and Comanche 
Reservations in the Indian Territory were ordered by the Department 
of the Interior to remove their stock from said reservation by the ist 
day of May, 1903 ; that said order caused said stockmen great appre- 
hension and probable loss; that thereupon said stockmen contributed 
large sums of money to secure a modification of said order and an ex- 
tension of time until July i, 1903; that they procured said Bailey to 
represent them before the Department of the Interior, both before the 
Secretary of said Department, and on appeal to the President; that 
large sums of money were paid to the said Bailey for said services so 
rendered, or as gratuities or loans." 

The witness Bailey (continuing p. 907) — There is not a syllable 
of truth in it. * * * It involves the same transaction I detailed 
while ago with reference to the Burnett charge. 

The information upon which the foregoing charge was based by 
the proponent of the charges, was in writing and furnished by Hon. 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 313 

W. O. Davis of Gainesville, Texas, was as follows : "During the 
spring of 1903, with a view to the opening up of the Kiowa and Co- 
manche country for settlement, the cattle men were ordered by the 
Interior Department to remove their stock from the country by the 
ist of May. The stock men contended that this was too early for the 
removal of their cattle, without great loss. They made up quite a 
large sum of money, and Bailey was employed to represent them be- 
fore the Interior Department, and procure an extension of the time 
until July ist. Bailey appeared before the Interior Department, but 
was overruled by Hitchcock, the Secretary of the Interior. Bailey 
then appealed from Hitchcock to the President, and the President 
granted the extension. The cattle men made up quite a large sum of 
money which was sent to Washington, and Bailey doubtless received 
the greater portion of it." 

While at San Angelo the author learned from citizens there that 
the sum of money referred to by Mr. Davis was in fact made up and 
forwarded to Washington for the use, benefit and behoof of the "trai- 
tors of the Senate" through some confidential source. 

In this connection the following signed letters to the proponent 
of the charges, while the Suppression was in progress before the 
Committee in January and February, 1907, are of interest. 

"Abilene, Texas, March 1 1, 1907. 

"During the Bailey investigation I noticed in the paper that you 
received a letter from Mr. Frank Kell stating that there was no 
grounds for the charge that Senator Bailey received money for the 
services he rendered the cattle men in keeping the Comanche Reser- 
vation from opening four years before it did. 

"A few days ago I met Mr. J. J. Kendrick, formerly of Clifton, 
Bosque county, Texas, but now of Gomez, Terry county, Texas. Mr. 
Kendrick stated to me that he and his brother and some other parties 
were in Mr. Jefif Gibb's office, at Clifton, Texas, of the firm of Kell 
and Gibbs who were engaged in the cattle business in the Indian Ter- 
ritory at the time that the opening up of this domain was deferred. 
Mr. Gibbs stated to these gentlemen that Senator Bailey used his in- 
fluence in keeping said domain from being opened up and for said 
influence Bailey received a portion of a fund made up by all the cattle 
men interested. Mr. Jefif Gibbs stated that Kell & Gibbs gave $500.00 
as their part to this fund and it was Mr. Gibbs' understanding that it 
was to go to Senator Bailey as compensation for the valuable services 
rendered. Mr. J. J. Kendrick, and also his brother, stated that they 
could give time and place and could furnish the names of the other 
parties present. 

"If you will write to Messrs. Kendrick Bros., of J. J. Kendrick of 
Gomaz, Texas, he or they will no doubt give you some very valuable 
information on this point. I think if you were to one time get the 
'king of Boodlers' before a court where he would not be judge, jury 
and counsel and prisoner all in one, you would be taking a long step 



314 Scuaior J. JV. Bailey of Texas Viniiaskcd 

in tlie direction of law cntorccincnt. Wishing you success in your 
undertaking, I am very respectfully." 

A letter from Mr. J. J. Kendrick, the gentleman referred to in the 
above letter, dated Gomaz, Texas, March 21, 1907, confirms the cor- 
rectness of the conversations referred to in the foregoing letter. 

Here follows another signed letter to the proponent of the charges 
on the same subject, dated Vernon, Texas, January 26, 1907. "I was 

informed by of Oklahoma City, who is a prominent banker of 

that town, that he knew that Senator Bailey received $15,000.00, as a 
fee from the cattle men, to detain the opening of the Oklahoma Coun- 
try. is a prominent Banker of Oklahoma City and can possi- 
bly give you valuable information on this matter; he also told me that 
Mr. Bailey fought them on their Statehood matters and deferred that 
matter all he could. 

"I hope your efforts will receive their just reward." 

It should be remembered that all these letters voluntarily reached 
the proponent of the charges from wholly disinterested citizens, at 
widely separate points and without any knowledge on the part of 
either of the facts stated by the others. For example here is another let- 
ter dated Henrietta, Texas, January 25, 1907, bearing on these same 
facts. All of which facts Bailey designated as being without a syllable 
of truth. The Henrietta letter just alluded to, is as follows: "I see in 
your supplemental charges that you are getting down close to some 
facts on Senator Bailey. Up to 1899, there were about three million 
acres of land known in the Territory as 'The Kiowa and Comanche 
Reservation' and lying just north of the Counties of Clay, Wichita 
and Wilbarger. Repeated efiforts had been made for six years to have 
congress open this up to settlement. In the mean time, it was being 
used by certain cattlemen to graze their cattle upon. In the spring of 
1898, Jno. Stephens, Member of Congress from this District, had a 
bill passed in the lower House of Congress and had it sent over to the 
Senate of the U. S. In the month of December, 1898, he withdrew it 
from the Senate, or else introduced another one in the House amend- 
ing the one in the Senate, so as to obviate the objections of the Senate 
Committee on Indian Affairs. He did this, mark you, in December, 
1898, and the Records at Washington will show this to be an absolute 
fact, and Mr. Stephens will also testify to it. Now, hereby hangs a 
tale. In the winter of 1899, this bill went to the Senate after having 
passed the House in its amended form, and the cattlemen became 
frightened and alarmed. They hurried to Washington and employed 
Mr. Bailey, so I have been informed by one of the witnesses herein- 
after given you. What was the result? In the amended bill intro- 
duced by Stephens in December, 1898, there was a provision to reserve 
a pasture for the Indians containing i;oo,ooo acres of land, which was 
situated by metes and bounds in the Wichita Mountains, at least 40 
miles north of Red River; thus leaving the lands along the Red River 
to be opened up for settlement. After the emplovment of Bailey, all 



The Political Life-Story of a fallen Idol 315 

of this was changed, and the pasture reserve of 500,000 acres was 
placed along the border of Red River so as to be opposite the Texas 
Ranches of S. B. Burnett and W. T. Waggoner; each of the latter 
named parties had ranches on the bank of the Red River in Wichita 
County, and they kept possession of most of said pasture reserve last 
described until about 18 months ago; thus securing to themselves a 
very valuable pasture opposite their ranches in Texas for at least six 
years. Now, in the bill introduced by Stephens in the House, there 
was a further provision that this 500,000 acre pasture reserve should 
not be opened to settlement, and should not be leased by any White 
man, but that it should be the grazing grounds of the Indians alone. 
Is it any wonder then, that in 1903, S. B. Burnett applied to Bai- 
ley to prevent his cattle from being excluded from said pasture on the 
order of the Secretary of the Interior? It is reported from good au- 
thority and generally believed that Burnett has loaned Bailey money 
on several occasions." 

The finding of the four Bailey partisans of the Suppression Com- 
mittee on the above charge was as follows: "We find, and the Com- 
mittee regards, this charge as immaterial and makes no findings 
thereon." (Bailey Investigation Committee Report, 1907, p. 1072). 
This amounts to an admission of the facts as charged. 

FEDER.AL CLERKSHIP GRAFT. 

CHARGE NO. 42. 

The 42nd charge read as follows : "That during his official career 
in Congress, the said J. W. Bailey either accepted a fee or a loan or a 
gift of a fund raised by Federal employes in the Indian Territory in 
consideration or in recognition of the of^cial and political services of 
the said J. W. Bailey in the matter of the passage of a 'Federal Court 
Fee Bill' through Congress, affecting said employes and officials of 
the Indian Territory." 

The witness Bailey (continuing p. 901) — 

The only other bill which I recall having been passed by Con- 
gress while I was a member of it in which I took any part at all, was 
a bill concerning the fees of the clerk or clerks, I believe there was 
only one clerk then, of the United States Court in the Indian Terri- 
tory. The clerk acted in a dual capacity of a clerk of the court of the 
United States and also as a clerk of the county or State court; in other 
words, the clerk of the court there performed all the duties pertain- 
ing to the court and then performed such duties as in the States are 
performed by the county clerks, recording mortgages and issuing 
marriage licenses and other services of that kind. The clerks who 
had held that office prior to this time had kept the fees arising from 
these services such as are performed by the clerks of county courts in 
the State, in our State, and there was no question about it on the part 
of the government. There arose, as I remember, some friction be- 
tween the clerk and the United States attorney there about it. My 



316 Senator J. W . Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

old law partner was judge of the court and he talked with me about 
it, and said he didn't think there was any question in the law as it stood 
at that time. 

Q. Your old law partner, Judge Stuart? 

A. Judge Charles B. Stuart, who is one of the best lawyers I 
ever knew in my life, didn't think there was any question at that time 
about the right of the clerk to these fees, but the clerk was a very de- 
voted friend of mine, was one of the very first men I ever met when I 
came to Texas and to the day of his death I did not have a more de- 
voted friend nor was there a man to whom I was more sincerely at- 
tached. In order to make it possible that there should be no grounds 
for friction between the attorney's office and the clerk's office. Judge 
Stuart recommended to me that the matter be made certain by 
statute. * * * It was passed through the House absolutely with- 
out objection, and the committee does not need even those circum- 
stances to show the committee it was a proper measure, when the com- 
mittee reflects that the clerk of the court of the Indian Territory in 
addition to his duties as clerk of the court performed these other vari- 
ous services. The committee will readily agree that having received 
the same pay for the service as clerk of the United States court that 
other clerks received, he was then entitled, if he performed services 
that they did not perform, to pay for those services which the other 
clerks did not perform and for which they would not receive pay. 

I had many business transactions with Mr. Philips in his time and 
mine. He, as I said a moment ago, was one of the first friends, indeed, 
he was the first man living at Gainesville that I met when I came to 
Texas. The night before I reached Gainesville I spent the night at 
Sherman, and Joe Philips, I met him there and he was the first Gaines- 
ville man that I knew when I came to Texas. * * * If he had 
been an educated man he would have been a remarkable one. He had 
brain enough to be the Governor of Texas, and talk about him having 
influenced anyone in their official relations would not be indulged 
very long if he were living. That man Davis that the committee saw 
sit there and hang his head like a dog [This is the unkind thrust that 
called for Senator Davis' very scathing reply on the subject of a "high 
head" hereinbefore set out.] when he testified v.ould no more have 
made that statement in Philips' lifetime, but he made that like he 
makes a great many other things that he does, behind men's backs, 
that he doesn't do to their face. [If all of this was true why did Bailey 
not acquiesce in the effort of the proponent of the charges to have the 
sub-committee, as it was to pass through the Indian Territory, go to 
the bank officials who knew the facts and make an effort to examine 
Bailey's canceled drafts on Philips and the notes that Philips had 
paid for him?] 

EX-UNITED STATES MARSHAL WILLIAMS TESTIFIES. 

Mr. J. S. (Sheb) Williams was sworn and testified in substance as 
follows (pages 1 58-161, Bailey Investigation Committee Report) : 



The Political Life-Story of a P alien Idol 317 

I was United States Marshal for the Eastern District of Texas that 
had jurisdiction over the Indian Territory — that was during the last 
Cleveland administration. I was in Washington with reference to a 
Federal Fee Bill in 1895, I think. Of course 1 saw Mr. Bailey every 
day repeatedly and I suppose that matter was discussed between him 
and myself. He was then in Congress. 

I made Mr. Bailey a loan, I think in 1893. I don't remember 
when it was paid. In one instance it was as much as $3,000. I don't 
recollect when the other loans or endorsements were made. We had 
transactions with ourselves and some loans and some endorsements, I 
could not recollect the date, but it was prior to all this, to my being 
Marshal. I think I was appointed on the 3rd dav of January, 1894. 
Yes, I remember making an endorsement for him for a loan for a 
party in Paris, from one Mr. Aiken, I don't recollect when that was 
paid. 

I do remember Mr. Connor was the attorney who attended to all 
the business for Col. Aiken, and I remember being called in by him 
into their office, in which they said that Mr. Bailey had not met this 
and it had to be paid, and I possibly wrote him a letter and they may 
have sent it, I don't know. 

Q. Did you ever write a letter in which you told Senator Bailey 
anvthing with reference to your knowledge of his connection with any 
affairs in the Indian Territory? 

A. I would like for you to explain; I don't understand you. 

Q. Well, did you ever write a letter of that kind, in which you 
referred to your knowledge of his connection with any affairs in the 
Indian Territory? 

A. I certainly did not, because if he ever was engaged in the Ter- 
ritory in any business whatever — 

Q. You never knew of his being connected with any legislation 
up there while a member of Congress? 

A. O, as to special legislation ; I know he must have been inter- 
ested in a way in taking from our court its jurisdiction over there, as 
a member of Congress. As I stated, a while ago, I think it was Mr. 
Little's bill, maybe a bill agreed upon, and I think it was, between Mr. 
Little of Arkansas and Mr. Culberson of our State. [This witness 
was put on the stand by the Committe over the protest of the propone;-! t 
of the charges and his attornev, because we were not ready just at 
that time, to cross-examine him for the reason that we vvere expecting 
more definite information from some attorneys in Paris, Texas, who 
were said to have read a threatening letter written by the witness, 
Williams, to Bailey. Threatening to expose Bailey's grafting in the 
Indian Territory unless Bailey should pay the Aiken note, upon which 
Williams was the endorser.] 

At the time I wrote the letter from Paris, Texas, to Mr. Bailey, I 
had not paid the note. [The Aiken note.] 



318 Senator J. ]V . Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

BAILEY ADMITS TRUTH OF FACTS INVOLVED IN CHARGES ABOUT PRAC- 
TICING BEFORE THE DEPARTMENTS, BUT DENIES CONCLUSIONS 
SOUGHT TO BE DRAWN THEREFROM. 

The witness Bailey (on cross-examination, p. 975) — 

Q. Now, then, Senator, with reference to these charges that have 
been made of your services, your assistance to the various parties 
named in these charges, while all these services were rendered gratu- 
itously and in the prooer line of your duty as a representative as you 
understand it, is it a fact that in each of these instances these parties 
either had loaned you, have loaned you money at some time or en- 
dorsed your note? 

A. No; it is not a fact. They have picked out men who were 
my friends. 

Q. I mean the particular men who are mentioned in these 
charges. 

A. That is what I say, they have picked out the men who were 
my friends, and I think they have picked out every man for whom I 
ever did a service, these particular friends of mine, except Jot Gun- 

Q. Well, all the men they have picked out had something to do 
with the department? 

A. Yes, sir; that is the infamous part of it, that they would go 
around and pick out the friends with whom I had dealt, and hundreds 
of men for whom I did similar services, they didn't say anything 
about. That is an infamous lie they put in here. They have tele- 
graphed all over this State. I know within the last few days a tele- 
gram that has been sent down in my old Congressional district asking 
men to bring letters here, as if I had been writing something wrong, 
and this State has been scoured for every instance like this, and hon- 
orable men dragged up here and charged with having sought to cor- 
rupt a public servant. [It was a remarkable fact that the proponent 
of the charges could not send a telegram out of Austin while the sup- 
pression committee was in session, without Bailey immediately getting 
a copy thereof. Such was his hold on this public service corporation. 
The particular telegram to which he refers above, was sent by the 
proponent of the charges to a man in Collin county who had posses- 
sion of certain letters from Bailey to a third person wherein Bailey 
offered to "loan" this third person, an intense Bailey partisan, money 
with which to pay his campaign expenses if he would run for the 
Texas legislature that was to re-elect Bailey to the U. S. Senate.] 

Q. Well, that applies to all they have picked out, don't it? 

A. Most every one except — it applies to all I have had close per- 
sonal and friendly relations with — every one of these men they have 
picked out, and at some time or another I have had some business 
transaction. 

During the Crane-Bailey Houston Debate, October 6, 1906, Bai- 
ley said : "I never in my life took a fee to appear before any Legisla- 



The Political life-Story of a Fallen Idol 319 

ture or Assembly or before any Department of this Government from 
the Federal courts down; never in my life did I appear before any of 
them. I practice law, not influence. They can not buy my influence, 
but they have paid me for my law." In other words, he practiced his 
so-called "law" for fc-3 and practiced "influence" for "his picked per- 
sonal friends" for loans, endorsements and various and sundry other 
favors. One great trouble with Bailey is and always has been, that he 
seems to have had no perception of the finer sensibilities that would 
cause a truly patriotic, upright servant to avoid putting himself under 
obligations to those who sought to use him. It is very evident that he 
never read or practiced the truism that a man should avoid "even the 
appearance of evil." In the Houston debate Bailey also said, "They 
say a man can not be an honest Senator and practice the honest pro- 
fession of law at the same time. I agree with them that the rule ap- 
plies to themselves but it does not apply to me. * * * Of course, 
I wouldn't advise a man weak enough to fall to try to learn anything 
or from him [Kirby]." Of course Bailey was not "weak enough" to 
fall. 

BAILEY NOT WAxNTED IN OKLAHOMA. 

Although Mr. Bailey, in one of his speeches to the 30th Legisla- 
ture, boasted that, if the people of Texas no longer desired his services 
as their Senator, there were a number of States in the Union the peo- 
ple of which would be glad to so honor him, referring especially to 
Oklahoma as one such constituency. It is very significant, however, 
during the political campaign of 1907, when Oklahoma's Constitu- 
tion was being debated, and the balance of political power uncertain, 
that William J. Bryan was invited into that section — but J. JV. Bailey 
made no speeches there. No wonder the people of Oklahoma dis- 
trusted Bailey, not only for his general course of misconduct, but, for 
the particular reason also, that he always opposed joint statehood. 
For many years it was his alleged desire to see two states formed in- 
stead of one. Bailey's departmental practice and the public senti- 
ment in these territories since, however, has indicated that Bailey's 
real objection to Statehood was on account of the injury that would 
follow to Bailey's wealthy cattlemen clients, such as Suggs, Burnett, 
et al. 

In this connection, it will be recalled that as late as February 7, 
1905, Bailey made a speech in the United States Senate against State- 
hood for these Territories, which address was without force or logic, 
but which wound up with perhaps the most eloquent passage of his 
oratorical career, in fervent praise of Texas and her history. This 
address was a failure as an argument against Statehood for the Ter- 
ritories, but attained marked popular favor as a short oration. _ 

As a matter of fact the author has received many communications 
condemning Mr. Bailey's practices from citizens of Oklahoma, in- 
cluding former Texans. Just as one illustration of their sentiment, the 
following memorial is characteristic: 



320 



Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 



"Elmer, Okla., March 4th, 1907. 
"To the Honorable IV. A. Cocke, Austin, Texas. 

"Our Esteemed Sir: — We the undersigned citizens of Elmer, 
Okla., most heartily disapprove of the services rendered by Senator 
Bailey in behalf of the great Corporations and Trusts while he was 
serving the people of the great state of Texas as United States Senator. 

"We know it to be impossible for even Senator Bailey to serve both 
the people and the Trust Masters at the same time, because the inter- 
est of the people and the interest of the Trusts conflict with each other. 

"Having carefuUv read the evidence brought out by the Investi- 
gating Committee, and having watched your untiring efforts in behalf 
of the great masses of the people, truth and justice, we wish to express 
to you our heartfelt gratitude for your great work, and commend you 
to the present and coming generations. 
Most sincerely," 



(Signed) 






Wiley Mudgett 


C. B.White 


L. H. McConnell, m. d 


]. C. WiTTIN 


A. Kahle 


E. C. Brown 


G. K. Bellinger 


y. P. HOLLADAY 


A. H. Humphry 


G. W. Barr 


R. L. King 


Cr. Vernon 


R. S. Dickson 


T. F. Hatton 


y. H. Sharbutt 


E. M. Yeldill 


L. A. Durham 


C. W. E ASTON 


A. T- Rattiff 


R. E. Bruner 


B. F. Flowers 


J. B. Stewart 


J. S. Moore 


J. W. Dicks 


R. F. King 


W. L. Karsteter 


J. D. Yeldill 



A MEMBER OF THE 1907 INVESTIGATION 
COMMITTEE. 




HUX. T. H. McGKKGOR, 
Houston, Texas. 



The Political Lifc-Story of a Fallen Idol 321 

CHAPTER XV. 
CHARGES STATED. 

"Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, 
but inwardly they are ravening wolves. Ye shall know them by their 
fruits. Do men gather grapes of thornes, or figs of thistles? Even 
so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bring- 
eth forth evil fruit. A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither 
can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. Every tree that bringeth 
not forth good fruit is hewn down and cast into the fire. Wherefore 
by their fruits ye shall know them." — The Scriptures. 

STATE OF TEXAS, 

County of Travis. 

Investigation In Re J. IF. Bailey, pending before the Investigating 
Committees of the State Senate and House of Represen- 
tatives of the Texas Legislature 

To Said Honorable Committees: 

Now comes William A. Cocke, a member of the Thirtieth House 
of Representatives, Texas Legislature, and, upon information and 
belief, alleges and charges |. W. Bailey as follows: 

First — That J. W. Bailey, while a member of the United States 
Congress, became financially interested in a certain mule contract with 
the United States Government, in violation of the law and in contra- 
vention of his congressional duties, said contract having been pro- 
cured for one Steger & LaBatt of Texas, by said J. W. Bailey. 

Second— That during the early months of the year 1900. J. W. 
Bailey entered into an agreement with one John Francis, a brother 
of David R. Francis of Missouri, as well as with said D. R. Francis, 
and one Joseph Sibley of Pennsylvania, together with H. C. Pierce 
of the Waters-Pierce Oil Company of Missouri (in consideration of 
which agreement and conspiracy and the services to be rendered 
thereunder by said |. W. Bailey, he was to be assisted in the purchase 
of the Gibbs ranch "in Dallas county, Texas), whereby the said J. W. 
Bailey undertook to use his personal, official and political influence 
and standing with his lifetime friend, Hon. Thomas S. Smith, then 
Attorney General of Texas, and with other State officials, to the end 
that the Waters-Pierce Oil Company, then and now a subsidiary com- 
pany of the Standard Oil Company, might defeat the ouster judgment 
which had been rendered against it in favor of the State of Texas, by 
which said Waters-Pierce Oil Company would be enabled to re-enter 
the State of Texas in violation of law. 

Third — That, in pursuance of said agreement aforesaid, and the 



322 Senator J. W. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

conspiracy thereby created, the said J. W. Bailey, on or about the 
25th day of April, 1900, called upon H. C. Pierce in the city of St. 
Louis, and then and there conspired with the said H. C. Pierce on 
behalf of the Waters-Pierce Oil Company and the Standard Oil Com- 
pany to defeat the aforesaid judgment of the courts of Texas, as af- 
firmed by the Supreme Court of the United States. 

Fourth — That the said J. W. Bailey well knew, or by the exercise 
of that patriotic prudence which should characterize the trusted rep- 
resentative of the people, should have known, that the said Waters- 
Pierce Oil Company was an intrastate trust and an outlaw in the State 
of Texas, and that the said H. C. Pierce, and other representatives of 
said company, were under indictment in the District Court of Mc- 
Lennan county, Texas, for violation of the anti-trust law of this State. 

Fifth — That notwithstanding such knowledge, the said J. W. Bai- 
ley on the date aforesaid, and in pursuance of the conspiracy herein- 
before alleged, accepted employm.ent from the Waters-Pierce Oil 
Com.pany and the said H. C. Pierce, and then and there did accept 
and receive the sum of at least thirty-three hundred dollars ($3,300) 
as a retainer fee for said services (pretending, however, that the said 
thirty-three hundred dollars was paid in form of a loan) ; that said 
thirty-three hundred dollars ($3,300) was in fact and in truth finan- 
cial compensation, or a fee, for his personal, political and official in- 
fluence in the premises. 

Sixth — That said J. W. Bailey's official duties then required his 
presence in the city of Washington, notwithstanding which he re- 
turned to the State of Texas in company with H. C. Pierce and J. D. 
Johnson, general attorney for the said Waters-Pierce Oil Company; 
that while enroute to Texas the said J. W. Bailey conspired with the 
said H. C. Pierce and the said J. D. Johnson, not only to secure the 
fraudulent re-admission of the Waters-Pierce Oil Company to the 
State of Texas, but also conspired with the parties aforesaid, to the 
end that certain penalty suits against said Company, then pending at 
Waco, Texas, and the indictment and litigation herein above alluded 
to should be compromised and dismissed on the best possible terms; 
that in pursuance of said conspiracy the said J. W. Bailey, while en- 
route to Texas telegraphed to one Oscar L. Stribling, of the law firm 
of Henry & Stribling of Waco, Texas, associate counsel for the State 
of Texas, in the penalty suits aforesaid, to meet said J. W. Bailey and 
his co-conspirators at Hillsboro, Texas, as they were enroute from St. 
Louis, Missouri, to Austin, Texas; that said Stribling did not meet 
said parties at Hillsboro, as requested by said telegram from said J. 
W. Bailey so to do ; that the said J. W. Bailey and his co-conspirators, 
failing to see said Stribling at Hillsboro, came on to Waco, Texas, 
and there conferred with local counsel for the Waters-Pierce Oil 
Company, towit, George Clark and Henry & Stribling, the latter firm 
being associate counsel for the State of Texas, and with the district 
judge before whom said penalty proceedings and indictments were 
then pending; that the purpose of said conference was to arrange an 



The Political Lifc-Slory of a Pollen Idol U5 

illegal disposition of llic liligalioii aforesaid; that said J. W. Bailey 
and his co-conspirators refrained at the time in question from calling 
upon one Cullen F. Thomas, county attorney for McLennan county, 
who then represented the State of Texas in the litigation pending at 
Waco, for the reason that the said Bailey and his co-conspirators 
deemed it wise to arrange with other interested parties, including 
Henry & Stribling, before they should approach the said Cullen F. 
Thomas in the premises. 

Seventh — That the said J. W. Bailey, H. C. Pierce and J. D. 
Johnson then continued their journey to Austin, Texas, where the 
said J. W. Bailey exercised his political, official and personal influ- 
ence with Thomas S. Smith, whom he had known and who had been 
his friend from boyhood, to induce the latter, as the Attorney General 
of Texas, to consent to a compromise of the ouster judgment against 
the said Waters-Pierce Oil Company; failing in which, the said J. W. 
Bailey then exercised his influence with said Thomas S. Smith to in- 
duce the latter to advise the Secretary of State to issue a new permit 
to the Waters-Pierce Oil Company upon its fraudulent dissolution 
and re-incorporation proposed by said J. W. Bailey to be had and 
without the necessity of mandamus proceedings; that said J. W. 
Bailey likewise, and at the same time, towit, on or about the ist day 
of May, 1900, exercised his personal, political and official influence 
with one D. H. Hardy, then Secretary of State, to induce the latter to 
issue a permit to the said Waters-Pierce Oil Company to do business 
in Texas upon the fraudulent dissolution and fictitious reorganiza- 
tion aforesaid, thus avoiding the necessity of said company manda- 
musing said Hardy and judicially determining its right to re-enter 
Texas. 

Eighth — That the said J. W. Bailey and his co-conspirators there- 
upon returned from Austin, Texas, to Waco, Texas, and resumed ne- 
gotiations looking to the dismissal of the litigation and indictment 
there pending and hereinbefore described; that the said J. W. Bailey 
on or about the 2d day of May, 1900, at the city of Waco, Texas, used 
his personal, official and political influence and prestige in an effort 
to secure the dismissal or compromise aforesaid, and to that end did 
approve and endorse a proposition to pay Henry & Stribling a sum 
of money about five times larger than they were entitled by law under 
the proposed compromise with the State of Texas, and used said il- 
legitimate ofifcr as an inducement to the said Flenry & Stribling, as- 
sociate counsel for the State, to induce them to make an illegitimate 
dismissal or compromise of the said litigation; that said J. W. Bailey, 
at the time and place last mentioned, used his personal, official and po- 
litical influence with the district judge before whom the litigation 
was pending in an efifort to influence said official in the premises; that 
said J. W^. Bailey and his co-conspirators did at the time make an un- 
successful effort to secure the approval of Cullen F. Thomas of the 
illegitimate settlement sought to be had. 

Ninth — That during the month of June, 1900, said J. W. Bailey, 



324 Scimtor J. W. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

in furtherance of the conspiracy hereinbefore alleged, participated 
in, endorsed, approved or connived at the payment to Oscar L. Strib- 
ling of the firm of Henry & Stribling aforesaid, the sum of fifteen 
hundred dollars ($1,500) as "hush money," to induce the said Strib- 
ling or the said Henry & Stribling to refrain from discharging; their 
official duties, by exposing the fraud involved in the re-admission of 
the Waters-Pierce Oil Company to the State of Texas on or about the 
31st day of May, 1900, and from prosecuting the litigation then pend- 
ing against said company; that said J. W. Bailey had been advised by 
the public press of the State that the re-admission aforesaid was 
openly charged to be fraudulent and in violation of the rights of the 
State of Texas, and that he was also advised thereof by correspon- 
dence passing between himself and J. D. Johnson, or himself and 
H. C. Pierce, or himself and George Clark, which facts were well cal- 
culated to put said J. W. Bailey upon notice (although it is here al- 
leged that he already v/ell knew the fact) ; that he represented interests 
adverse to those of the people of his State; that the fifteen hundred 
dollars ($1,500) "hush money" aforesaid, was falsely styled "a per- 
sonal loan" in an efifort to cunningly conceal the real nature of the 
transaction in the event of its subsequent disclosure, as was also the 
case with the thirty-three hundred dollars ($3,300) paid direct to said 
J. W. Bailey by H. C. Pierce on April 15, 1900; that notes were exe- 
cuted for the said thirty-three hundred dollars ($3,300) and the said 
fifteen hundred dollars ($i,i;oo) in furtherance of this adroit device 
to deceive the people of Texas as to the actual character of their 
monetary dealings. 

Tenth — That the said J. W. Bailey well knew that the further sum 
of thirty-one hundred dollars ($3,100) was illegitimately distributed 
at Waco, Texas, by his co-conspirators to Henry & Stribling and pos- 
sibly to other interested parties, during the month of November, 1900, 
notwithstanding the said J. W. Bailey, on the 17th day of January, 
1907, in the Hall of the House of Representatives, Texas Legislature, 
made a false and deceptive statement with reference to said thirty-one 
hundred dollars, wherein he claimed that said sum was used for the 
fumigation and refurnishing of H. C. Pierce's private car on account 
of an alleged case of smallpox, which, as your informant is advised 
and believes, in fact never occurred. 

Eleventh — That said J. W. Bailey, during the month of Novem- 
ber, 1900, received of H. C. Pierce for the account of the Waters- 
Pierce Oil Company the sum of two hundred dollars ($200), after 
being fully advised of the illegal and fraudulent status of said com- 
pany in the matter of its re-admission to the State of Texas; that dur- 
ing the year 1900 said J. W. Bailey likely had other and further finan- 
cial dealings with the Waters-Pierce Oil Company, of which your in- 
formant is not advised, but which should be investigated. 

Twelfth — That some time after the re-admission of the Waters- 
Pierce Oil Company to the State of Texas and the fraudulent dis- 
missal of the litigation then pending against said company and its 



The Political Life-Story of a tuilcii Idol 325 

officers at Waco, Texas, after said J. W. Bailey had used his personal, 
political and official influence to "quiet all Texas parties" he, said J. 
W. Bailey, received from the Standard Oil Company of New Jersey, 
or the Waters-Pierce Oil Company of Missouri, the additional sum 
of one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000) as compensation to said 
J. W. Bailey for the exercise of his influence aforesaid, notwithstand- 
ing the said J. W. Bailey, under oath, in the month of January, 1901, 
and many times thereafter, denied that he ever received any money 
from the Standard Oil Company or the Waters-Pierce Oil Company. 

Thirteenth — That during the month of January, 1901, at the pre- 
vious so-called investigation of some matters herein referred to, the 
said J. W. Bailey used his personal, political and official influence in 
formulating the charges then preferred, in shaping the form of the 
resolution calling for such investigation, by excluding therefrom the 
power to take depositions, and excluding from said committee the 
mover of said resolution; that on or about the 17th day of January, 
1901, said Bailey falsely and fraudulently concealed from said com- 
mittee the thirty-three hundred dollars ($3,300) received by him 
from the Waters-Pierce Oil Company, through H. C. Pierce, and the 
real nature of such transaction, and did also so conceal from said 
committee his numerous subsequent financial transactions with and 
for said H. C. Pierce and the Waters-Pierce Oil Company, and did 
thereby and thenceforth conceal from the people of Texas his real 
connection with and knowledge of the matters hereinbefore des- 
cribed; that the said Bailey did not conform to his official oath on the 
occasion of such investigation by telling the "whole truth," but wan- 
tonly and deceitfully concealed the gist of his transactions aforesaid 
with the said H. C. Pierce, the Waters-Pierce Oil Company and the 
Standard Oil Company. 

Fourteenth — That while en route to Texas in January, 1901, to 
defeat the investigation then proposed against him, the said J. W. 
Bailey advised H. C. Pierce, then president of the Waters-Pierce Oil 
Company, to forward the said Bailey the sum of five thousand dollars 
($5,000), which sum your informant believes was used by said Bailey 
to defeat said investigation, or to so manipulate the same as to exoner- 
ate himself and shield the Waters-Pierce Oil Company, to the shame 
and loss of Texas. 

Fifteenth — That the said J. W. Bailey testified to the said investi- 
gating committee, "that an honest man could make nothing in the 
public service"; that the said J. W. Bailey now declares from the 
United States Senate that he "despises those public men who think 
it necessary to remain poor in order to be considered honest." 

Sixteenth — That the said J. W. Bailey testified to said committee, 
in explanation of his return to Texas, after conference in St. Louis 
with H. C. Pierce in behalf of the Waters-Pierce Oil Company, that 
"he was then on his way to Washington"; that the said J. W. Bailey 
during the month of September or October, 1906, in public addresses 
in Texas, explaining the same transaction, stated that he must have 



326 Scmilor J. W. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

gone to Kentucky to "see" some liorses during the interval between 
April 25, 1900, and May 3, 1900; that on or about the 6th day of De- 
cember, 1906, the said J. W. Bailey, explaining the same transaction 
over his signature, in an open letter to the press of Texas, stated, "I 
told him, however, that I was then on my way to Kentucky for the 
purpose of 'selling' some horses"; that these two last statements are 
inconsistent with and contradictory of said J. W. Bailey's sworn 
statement about the matter above set out, and that one or the other, or 
both, of said statements, are likely false, and raise a question involv- 
ing the veracity of said J. W. Bailey. 

Seventeenth — That subsequent to the election of J. W. Bailey to 
the high office of United States Senator by the Legislature of Texas, 
in January, 1901, the said J. W. Bailey negotiated a financial transac- 
tion with H. C. Pierce on behalf of the Waters-Pierce Oil Company, 
or the Standard Oil Company, in the city of Washington, or in the 
city of New York, about the ist day of March, 1901, now claimed by 
the said J. W. Bailey to have been a "personal loan" from H. C. 
Pierce to the said J. W. Bailey, but which, as your informant is ad- 
vised and believes, conceals a fee transaction amounting to eight thou- 
and dollars ($8,000) for some political or official service rendered to 
the said Waters-Pierce Oil Companv. or to H. C. Pierce; that your 
informant is advised and believes that said eight thousand dollars 
($8,000) was indeed paid to said Bailey as a fee for defeating, or to 
be by him used for that purpose, "Texas legislation," referred to in 
the next suceeding paragraphs, as was also the seventeen hundred 
and fifty dollars ($1,750), referred to in the second succeeding par- 
agraph hereof. 

Eighteenth — That during the month of March, 1901, the said J. 
W. Bailey left his official duties at Washington and returned to the 
State of Texas for the purpose of using his personal, political and 
official influence and prestige with the Legislature of Texas to defeat 
the Senate bill No. 164, introduced into said body by Senators Grin- 
nan and Davidson, which act affected, adversely, the interests of the 
Waters-Pierce Oil Company, and to defeat House bill No. 422, in- 
troduced by Representative D. A. McFall, seeking to revoke the al- 
leged fraudulently acquired permit to do business by the fictitiously 
re-organized and re-admitted Waters-Pierce Oil Company, secured 
on the 31st day of May, 1900. 

Nineteenth — That said J. W. Bailey, in the furtherance of his 
political efforts and official influence just described, wrote to H. C. 
Pierce on the 28th day of March, 1901, for the sum of one thousand 
seven hundred and fifty dollars ($1,750), which he now claims was 
a part of the eight thousand dollars ($8,000), hereinabove alluded 
to, but which was, in fact, also used by said J. W. Bailey to influence 
legislation in Texas, or was appropriated by him as compensation 
for services so rendered, although the said J. W. Bailey has since 
falsely claimed that the said services were rendered gratuitously, be- 
cause he deemed the passage of such legislation a reflection upon his 
official character and standing. 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 327 

Twentieth — That during the early part of the year 1903 the said 
J. W. Bailey was employed by Banker Bayne of New York City, the 
latter being an official of the Seaboard National Bank, a Standard Oil 
Company ally, to prepare a charter for the Security Oil Company of 
Texas, which company said J. W. Bailey well knew, or by exercise of 
ordinary official discretion might have known, was to become a sub- 
sidiary company of the Standard Oil Company, and for which services 
J. W. Bailey was paid an unreasonable fee of five thousand dollars 
($5,000) ; that such fee was intended as compensation to said Bailey 
for political services then rendered, or afterwards to be rendered, to 
the Standard Oil Company and allied trust interests. 

Twenty-first — That about the same time said J. W. Bailey sup- 
ported the Aldrich currency measure, against every Democratic Sen- 
ator; that the author of said bill was the father-in-law of the son of 
John D. Rockefeller, president of the Standard Oil Company, and 
that said J. W. Bailey's attitude upon this bill was probably influenced 
by his connection with and obligation to the Standard Oil Company 
and allied corporate trust interests; that J. W. Bailey has become a 
frequenter of 26 Broadway, New York, that notorious rendezvous of 
the Standard Oil subsidiary companies, and has frequently been in 
and about said offices, and has attended meetings of officers of said 
company or companies. 

Twenty-Second — That during his term of office as United States 
Senator the said J. W. Bailey had large financial transaction with and 
for the Kirby Lumber Company of Texas, and John H. Kirby per- 
sonally, wherein and whereby, on account of his close connection with 
the Standard Oil Company and other large financial trust interests, 
the said J. W. Bailey was able to dispose of certain securities belong- 
ing to the said Kirby Lumber Company, or John H. Kirby, and for 
which he received a fee of two hundred and twenty-five thousand 
($225,000) dollars, and an alleged interest in the said company of one 
million ($1,000,000) dollars; that said transaction and connections 
for and with said trust interests so embarrass said J. W. Bailey as to 
render him totally unfit for and ineligible to the office of United 
States Senator from Texas. 

Twenty-Third — That during the term of service of said J. W. 
Bailey as United States Senator he became interested in or connected 
with the Tennessee Construction Company and the Tennessee Rail- 
road allied coal interests to such an extent as to embarrass his public 
service, and in which he represented interests adverse to those of his 
legislative duties in that the railroad property in question was and is 
afJected by interstate commerce legislation and the carrying of United 
States mails; that the coal property connected therewith was and is 
affected by the tariff on coal; that said properties were of the aggre- 
gate value of thirteen million dollars ($13,000,000) , and that this 
matter should be carefully investigated by your committee; that dur- 
ing the month of December, 1906, the said J. W. Bailey stated in a 
quasi-public interview in the city of San Antonio, Texas, the fact of 



328 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

his havino; borrowed hundreds of thousands of dollars from H. Clay 
Pierce, and his associates, including one "loan" of one hundred and 
fifty-six thousand dollars ($156,000), which he used in speculating, 
and which speculation, your informant is advised, involved the 
Standardizing of the Southwestern Oil Company, and possibly the 
Houston Oil Company of Texas, by which competition in oils and oil 
products in this State has been practically eliminated; that, as a re- 
sult, the people of this State are annually mulcted of millions of 
dollars. 

Twenty-Fourth — That during the year 1901; the said Bailey col- 
lected at one time a fee of one hundred and eighteen thousand dollars 
($118,000) through the Red River National Bank of Gainesville, 
Texas, as a profit on some railroad transaction, the exact nature of 
which your informant does not know, but about which he would re- 
spectfully refer you to the said |. W. Bailey for further information. 

Twenty-Fifth — That during the year 1906 said J. W. Bailey had 
a large financial transaction, including a note for twenty-eight thou- 
sand one hundred dollars ($28,100), with John W. Gates, once of 
Texas, afterwards of Chicago, and now of New York, involving, as 
your informant believes, Mr. Bailey's additional connection with 
large trust interests, perhaps the Wire and Steel Trusts. 

Twenty-Sixth — That during his otificial career in Congress the 
said J. W. Bailey became financially interested in certain enterprises 
with John W. Gates, formerly of Port Arthur, Texas, and received 
certain financial benefits in consideration of his official support of 
certain national legislation afifecting Port Arthur, Texas, in the matter 
of its shipping interests. 

Twenty-Seventh — That the said J. W. Bailey now denies having 
"guided and directed" the Waters-Pierce Oil Company back into the 
State of Texas in 1900, whereas, in the city of Waco, in the month of 
August, 1900, at the Democratic State Convention, Mr. Bailey used 
the following language: "Don't blame Smith, Attorney General; 
don't blame Hardy, Secretary of State; for I have assumed the whole 
responsibility of the introduction of the Waters-Pierce Oil Company 
in Texas." That Mr. Bailey's signed letter to the public press on or 
about December 6, 1906, was in direct contradiction of the above 
quoted language, and raises the question of his veracity and candor, 
as well as a question of fact with reference thereto. 

Twenty-Eighth — That during the summer of 1906 Mr. Bailey 
stated to creditable witnesses that while he received no fee for his 
services for the Waters-Pierce Oil Company in the matter of its re- 
admission, he regretted that he did not in fact "tell the investigating 
committee of 1901 that he did receive a fee, and let them make the 
most of it." That this statement on the part of Mr. Bailey showed a 
regret on his part that he did not in fact stultify himself while testify- 
ing under oath, and displayed a willingness on his part so to do if such 
conduct on his part would subserve his political ambition. 

Twenty-Ninth — That when the present senatorial controversy 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 329 

was heightened by the disclosures made in November, 1906, in the 
present suit in Travis county, Texas, wherein the State of Texas is 
plaintiff and the Waters-Pierce Oil Company is defendant, which 
disclosures seem to reflect upon the said J. W. Bailey, the latter, on 
the 29th day of November, 1906, had published in all the leading 
daily papers in Texas the following wilful, malicious and wholly 
false aspersion upon the legal department of Texas and the Attorney 
General thereof: "The course which the Attorney General has now 
adopted now confirms me absolutely in my opinion that he is a part 
and parcel of a deliberate and sedate conspiracy to defeat a Demo- 
cratic nominee and defame an honorable man"; that such language 
and the false opinion therein declared had no foundation in fact, but 
was devised by said Bailey in a desperate attempt to conceal his guilt, 
to becloud the real issues and to continue to deceive the people of 
Texas in order that he might remain ostensibly in their service while 
laboring only for his own selfish, political and financial ends; that 
such conduct is unbecoming a man seeking to retain his high ofiice, 
and the proof thereof is shown by the refusal of said Bailey to permit 
his supporters in the present Legislature to provide for an investiga- 
tion of the Attorney General's Department of Texas. 

Thirtieth — That the said J. W. Bailey, on or about the 28th day of 
December, 1906, at Waco, Texas, and subsequently, to-wit, on or 
about the 3d day of January, 1907, in a public address at Austin, 
Texas, deliberately, wilfully, wantonly, and maliciously misrepre- 
sented and deceitfully suppressed material portions of the decisions 
of the Court of Civil Appeals, Third Judicial District of Texas, 19th 
Civil Appeals, p. i, State of Texas vs. Waters-Pierce Oil Company, 
affecting the ouster decree affirmed against said company by the Su- 
preme Court of the United States in the year 1899; that such misrep- 
resentation and suppressions were intended to deceive the people of 
McLennan and Travis counties, and the people of Texas, as to the fact 
of the Waters-Pierce Oil Company having been declared to be an in- 
trastate trust; that such false and deceitful conduct was wholly unbe- 
coming a candidate for the United States Senate and raises a question, 
not only of his candor, but of his veracity. 

Thirty-First — That on or about the 5th day of January, 1907, in 
a public address in the city of Austin, Texas, in behalf of his political 
ambitions and machinations, the said J. W. Bailey likewise wilfully, 
wantonly, and maliciously charged the attorneys for the State of 
Texas with having stolen a fixed sum of money from the State of 
Texas in connection with cause No. 23,046, District Court of Travis 
county, State of Texas vs. Cassidy Southwestern Commission Com- 
pany et al. ; that said J. W. Bailey well knew of the false and deceitful 
assertions there charged and thereby became guilty of untruthful as- 
sertions and conduct wholly unbecoming a candidate for the high 
office of United States Senator; that such misrepresentations are cal- 
culated to injure and destroy the efficiency of the legal department of 
Texas. 



330 Senator J. ]V. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

Thirty-Second — That during his official career in Congress the 
said J. W. Bailey either accepted a fee, or a loan, or a gift, of a fund 
raised by Federal employes in the Indian Territory in consideration 
or in recognition of the official and political services of the said J. W. 
Bailey in the matter of the passage of a "Federal court fee bill" 
through Congress, affecting said employes and officials of the Indian 
Territory. 

Thirty-Third — That you informant is advised and believes that 
the said J. W. Bailey, directly or indirectly, spent considerable sums 
of money in his effort to carry Travis county in the primaries held 
therein on the 5th day of January, 1907, and that at least a portion of 
said money was spent in ways unbecoming a candidate for the United 
States Senate from Texas; that during said campaign the said Bailey 
procured to be present in Austin persons from different parts of the 
State to assist him in his illegitimate and unbecoming methods; that 
prior to the assembling of the Legislature and thenceforward until 
now, the said Bailey has assembled at the city of Austin a considerable 
number of professional lobbyists, who used and are using all the arts 
known to their nefarious business in an effort to influence the Legisla- 
ture of Texas, first, against the investigation of said Bailey's fitness 
for said office, and, second, to so circumscribe said investigation as to 
block the way to the real facts; that the said J. W. Bailey has called 
into consultation different members of the Legislature of Texas and 
sought to browbeat and coerce them in their duties as Legislators by, 
among other things, threatening to go into the districts of those oppos- 
ing him and defeat their re-election in the event that they continued 
in their efforts to secure a real investigation of said Bailey. 

Thirty-Four — That the said J. W. Bailey has just procured to be 
present in the city of Austin T. D. Johnson, of St. Louis, general attor- 
ney for the Waters-Pierce Oil Company, and one Van Blarcom, also 
of St. Louis, and one Nordani (or some such name) auditor of the 
Waters-Pierce Oil Company or the Standard Oil Company. For 
what purpose and at whose expense these parties are assembling at 
the capitol of Texas, your informant is not specially advised. 

Thirty-Fifth— That the said J. W. Bailey is financially interested 
in the Fort Worth Record, a daily newspaper published in Fort 
Worth, Texas; that he is directly or indirectly financially and polit- 
ically interested in the editorial and news policies of the Austin Daily 
Statesman and the Houston Daily Post; that the latter connections 
come about through his financial connections with John H. Kirby, 
Kirby Lumber Company, the Houston Oil Company, the Southwest- 
ern Oil Company, the Waters-Pierce Oil Company, and the Standard 
Oil Company; that such direct and indirect connection with said 
daily newspapers is being used by said J. W. Bailey in violation of 
the fundamental law of the land, guaranteeing the right of free 
speech and freedom of the press, wherein and whereby said J. W, 
Bailey's connections and conduct just complained of are well calcu- 
lated to subvert the institutions of free government and the right of 



71ie Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 331 

the common people, as against "the interests," with which the said 
J. W. Bailey is here charged as having become connected, as against 
the interests of the people of Texas and of the United States. 

Thirty-Sixth — That there are other and further facts afifecting the 
official conduct and integrity of the said J. W. Bailey, concerning 
which your informant is not yet sufficiently advised to justify allega- 
tions, but concerning which he desires the permission of your commit- 
tee to file supplemental allegations hereinafter in the event such proof 
can probably be had. 

Very respectfully submitted, 
Wm. a. Cocke, 

Member House of Representatives, 

ThirtietJi Texas Legislature. 

[Supplemental charges just referred to were afterwards filed and 
are restated and the evidence thereon reviewed in this work under the 
preceding chapter entitled, "Bailey Practices Before Governmental 
Departments For Loans, Etc." The evidence in support of major 
charges, just quoted, has been classified and will now be reviewed in 
the succeeding chapters.] 



332 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 



ANTIDOTES FOR BAILEYISM. 



A man in public life, or occupying a trust relation in private 
life, has a right, nay even it is his duty, to suspect the good faith of any 
proposed employment, favor or compensation, coming from those 
who seek or who are in a position to profit by his official influence. 
Honest people make no such advances. — The Author. 

Discretion in speech, is more than eloquence. — Bacon. 

Discretion is the perfection of reason, and a guide to us in all the 
duties of life. It is only found in men of sound sense and good un- 
derstanding. — Bruyere. 

Gratuitous violence in argument betrays a conscious weakness of 
the cause, and is usually a signal of despair. — Junius. 

It is in disputes, as in armies, where the weaker side sets up false 
lights, and makes a great noise to make the enemy believe them more 
numerous and strong than they really are. — Swift. 

Do not talk about disgrace from a thing being known, when the 
disgrace is, that the thing should exist. — Falconer. 

It will not do for the public official to say that he is above the lusts, 
the avarice, and the temptations, of his fellow men. In so saying he 
does himself an injustice, no less than the people he thus misrepre- 
sents. — The Author. 

Dishonesty is a forsaking of permanent for temporary advantages. 
— Bovee. 

Dissimulation is but a faint kind of policy or wisdom, for it asketh 
a strong wit and a strong heart to know when to tell the truth, and to 
do it; therefore it is the weaker sort of politicians that are the great- 
est dissemblers. — Bacon. 

Dissimulation in youth is the forerunners of perfidy in old age. 
It degrades parts and learning, obscures the lustre of every accom- 
plishment, and sinks us into contempt. The path of falsehood is a 
perplexing maze. One artifice leads on to another, till, as the intri- 
cacy of the labyrinth increases, we are left entangled in our own snare. 
—Blair. 

Dissimulation is ever productive of embarrassment; whether the 
design is evil or not, artifice is always dangerous and almost inevitably 
disgraceful. The best and safest policy is, never to have recourse to 
deception, to avail yourself of quirks, or to practice low cunning, but 
to prove yourself in every circumstance of life upright and sincere. 



The Political Lifc-Stury of a Fallen Idol 333 

This system is that which noble minds will adopt, and the dictates of 
an enlightened and superior understanding would be sufficient to in- 
sure its adoption. — Bruyere. 

The legislative representative, State or National, especially if he 
be a lawyer, may undertake to fool himself into thinking that favors 
by lobbyists will not influence him against the people— if so, then he 
fails to give value to one or the other, either to the interests or to the 
people. — The Author. 

Fear is with the faithless, and faith is with the fearless. — Elbert 
Hubbard. 

Man moves in a mysterious way, his blunders to perform. — Elbert 
Hubbard. 

The heroism and persistency shown by criminals in following 
their bent is admirable, were it not appalling. — Elbert Hubbard. 

The ass knoweth his stall and the ox his master's crib. — The Scrip- 
tures. 

The grafter in public life does by indirection what the assassin 
does directly, and as between the two the former is perhaps more cul- 
pable — certainly he is more dangerous to the whole people. — The 
Author. 

Pure doctrine always bears fruit in pure benefits. — Emerson. 

When you doubt, abstain. — Zoroaster. 

Doubt comes in at the window when inquiry is denied at the door. 
— Jowett. 

The brave man wants no charms to encourage him to duty, and the 
good man scorns all warnings that would deter him from doing it. — 
— Bulwer. 

God always has an angel of help for those who are willing to do 
their duty. — T. L. Cuyler. 

To what gulfs a single deviation from the path of human duties 
leads! — Byron. 

There is no evil we cannot lace or fly from, but the consciousness 
of duty disregarded. — Daniel JVebsler. 

Perish discretion when it interferes with duty. — H. Moore. 



334 Senator J. W. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 



CHAPTER XVI. 
A CHAPTER OF STANDARD OIL EXHIBITS. 

Washington, D. C, November 29, (San Antonio Express, Nov. 
30,) 1906. 

Among other things in an interview given to the press on the dis- 
closures by General Davidson, Mr. Bailey said: 

"The State, however, cannot possibly prove that I ever accepted 
employment or compensation from the Waters-Pierce Oil Company 
for the very sufficient reason that such is not the truth. 

"If those who represent the State have any vouchers or papers pur- 
porting to have been signed by me and acknowledging the receipt of 
money from the Waters-Pierce Oil Company, they have been forged; 
and if they produce any such papers in the court, I will prove that they 
are forgeries; or if they attempt to prove by secondary evidence that 
such papers exist in anybody's possession, I will convict the man who 
so swears of perjury. The statement that I ever drew a draft or gave 
an order on the Waters-Pierce Company in favor of anybody, for any 
amount, or for any purpose, is an absolute and unqualified lie." 

The transcript of the testimony taken in the Waters-Pierce Oil 
Company trial at Austin, Texas, in connection with the introduction 
of the Bailey vouchers, drafts, telegrams and letters, after the State's 
attorney had offered to introduce these records to show that the Stan- 
dard Oil Company had audited them, shows that the attorneys for the 
Waters-Pierce Oil Company objected to their Introduction on the 
ground that Bailey's connection with these transactions would preju- 
dice the jury. Thereupon the correctness and genuineness of these 
instruments was acknowledged by the attorneys for the oil company 
in agreeing to the following memorandum: "The vouchers are with- 
drawn, and the following agreement is made: It is agreed that the 
expenditures made as early as June I^, IQOO, and authorized by 
H. C. Pierce, were thereafter audited by auditors of the Standard 
Oil Company." 

The facsimile reproductions of tlie famous instruments, admitted 
to be genuine, follow on the succeeding pages: 



STANDARD OIL EXHIBIT XO. I. 



"A FALLEN IDOL." 




JOSEPH WELDON BAILEY. 
Known in the Secret Cipher Code of Standard Oil as Senator '■Repuhlisli." 



The rolitical Ufc-Story of a Fallen Idol 



335 



STANDARD OIL EXHIBIT NO. 2. 



*' My Dear Pierce: 



left. 
JOHN O.ROCKtfOnR 

;.OAN aTS05I BflNKtR 

lOAm SLCOREO 

BY OfflCI/lL 

(NftUENCt ^SCil 




"Your Friend truly, 

J. W. Bailey." 



336 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 



STANDARD OIL EXHIBIT NO. 3. 



A FATAL "LOAN. 

ST t»,ra. mo—JZbc^S^:^:^ .. 1800 

Watebs Pierce Oil Compamt. 'A/-/^/^/ 

TO '^' ^^IMtict^^ OR 







Bailey took this $3,300 from Pierce the first day they met, being 
the very day, April 25th, 1900, that the Mandate of the U. S. Supreme 
Court was filed with the Clerk of the District Court at Austin forever 
barring the Oil Trust from Texas — But Bailey immediately brought 
it back. 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 337 



STANDARD OIL EXHIBIT NO. 4. 
A SIGNIFICANT TELEGRAM WITH MEMORANDUM ATTACHED. 



'"the western union telegraph company- 

INOORPORATCQ 

ai.ooo orriCES in amebica. C AOLg-^E RvicE to au, tmc world, 

RECEIVEDiii«iia4i«PHEST«En.S7.iouis.Ma __ 



H.<lt»^ 



133« Ch. Ml. «». S6 PMd **• 

I4IW Tlebagaawo. Wl«», June 12. 
trdi<n>1C flDlay, 

St. Louts. 

,If »J*nSon approves authoilic Sailey to loan Stribjitig on bis not? 

fifte*n hundred BaUey should <juJet ell Tcraa farilet tell hltn 1 

will see hlnv soon., 

•^^«>^-«i___ .-^ ^^ Plei«e. iU»am 

"That telegram is a forgery just like the draft is a forgery. They 
forged the telegram to lay the predicate for forging the draft. Some- 
how God has so created the universe that a lie can not prevail. [He 
now knows by experience.] I know that the draft which is supposed 
to be based on the telegram is a forgery." — J. W. Bailey, at Dublin, 
Texas, (Dallas News, Dec. 21, 1906.) 



338 



Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 



STANDARD OIL EXHIBIT NO. 5. 



EVIDENCE OF THE FAMOUS $1,500 DRAFT. 



WATCeS PlEPCe OtU COMPANV, 
TO 



St t^K M» 






S^J^J^ 









^■\f 








tooO ■ F»o" WATIRS Pierce Oil Comi»«wy 



( rwkv PA«*<iEHTOf ASOve accflWNt 



DRAFT AmCHED 



^^^^^"^RlcEiv^of WATERS PIERCE OIL COMPANY. 




:;^^ 



"If they can prove [the draft] it will convict me of a falsehood. 
Bring on the draft and convict me of a falsehood." — J. W. BAILEY, at 
Comanche, Texas. (Galveston News, Dec. 19th, 1906.) 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 



339 



STANDARD OIL EXHIBIT NO. 6. 



PIERCE TO GRUET. 








^^'y-i/c..^^^ -^ : v//>>^ 



Ji^%c^^u/ey>:^^^- 






.<«****- 






C(U YnU. ^c/x /m ^l 



7/^ 



Pierce writes Gruet that he paid Bailey eight thousand dollars. 
Within two weeks Bailey came to Texas to defeat legislation ad- 
verse to the Waters-Pierce Oil Company in March, 1901. 

The above letter was written the very day Bailey took the oath of 
ofBce as U. S. Senator from the State of Texas. 



340 



Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 



STANDARD OIL EXHIBIT NO. 7. 
A "PRIVATE LOAN" TO A "PUBLIC MAN." 
















^o^^ 



■ 4>^ ;C ^»j^^^ ><-»» <;«" t^'i^-'^.^ •?::<«-.> 






|g£%i^ 



^A/<l:^a- 



Bailey testified that this loan was paid by being merged into a 
larger one of twenty-four or twenty-five thousand dollars, and de- 
clined to say just how the latter was paid lest an inquiry would follow 
as to how he "paid the next one." 

This note was given just three days before Bailey crossed over 
from the Lower House of Congress to the U. S. Senate, where he 
swore allegiance to his public duties. 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 341 

STANDARD OIL EXHIBIT NO. 8. 



C>lne»<l'< ^«'>* 






«v<r<as Dicflce oil company, 

««i«'iou>J.HiSS9v«). «ui« 10tn,.1901. 




nr. *. p. 6tu«, 

geerftary, emldlflgj 
Pear 6ir:- 

Pl*a6e•5<•'^a Kcw'VorK. #xeha^s«•^'«r fljISoroo to Joseph W, t»ll«/, 
^Blresville, Texas, and ch3r«« against U|al'exppr3«B on bccoupkoS 
;«^s9 legislation. 

X sent this'amounfpersoiuliy to Mr- fistleymTfeponee to.hl> 
entlosed letter.of jfirch ^et.^. since tnenM'"- aai)<y h«9 r<t<»nved 
tpe emount Vo we. and It ts now properfor the.comparyta m»k« iM» 

AttacRifr. eaitey's.letttp'to your vouciwr ana loereiy eneloee 
tpe draft to Mmwittwut yeucher. )lls enciostd leitef >»iU tf youp 
«rouc^er.. 

*^ Presiaenf. 

Bailey's letter above quoted was written on /^ ^^ 
the day following our Texas Anniversary of /T-a-a 
the massacre of Goliad. (Pf^^^ 

Bailey always got the money sooner or 
later. 



342 



Senator J. Jl\ Bailey of Texas Unmasked 



STANDARD OIL EXHIBIT NO. 9. 

BAILEY COLLECTS FEE AS A STANDARD OIL LOBBYIST BEFORE TEXAS 
LEGISLATURE. 



l2^. 




_j»o/. FioH Watcrs Pie nee Oit coMPAfo 



//•y^ /2i^i^j-/'t^ 



This money evidently went direct from Waters-Pierce Oil Com- 
pany's office in St. Louis to J. IV. Bailey, as directed to the preceding 
letter from Pierce to Gruet. 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 343 

STANDARD OIL EXHIBIT NO. lO. 

(Copy Clark to Johnson.) 

Waco, Texas, June 5th, 1900. 
Jno. D. Johnson, Esq., Carleton Building, St. Louis, Mo. 

Dear Sir: The press of Texas have begun to take up the issue 
of the permit by the Secretary of the State, Hardy, in a vigorous 
manner. The ball was opened by the Austin Statesman on last Fri- 
day, and by the Houston Post on Sunday, and this morning the Waco 
morning paper, the Times Herald, is devoting considerable of its 
editorial space to the same matter. It appears to us that the action 
of the paper here has been inspired possibly by Mr. Thomas. The 
weekly press will doubtless take up the cry, and there is n great deal 
of dissatisfaction evident throughout the State. What it may lead 
to we can not say, but the condemnation of Hardy and Smith is al- 
most universal. 

In this connection you had best have Mr. Bailey communicate 
with Stribling. He is very restless and dissatisfied at the outcome 
here on last Friday, and threatens, privately to us, to institute pro- 
ceedings, and have a receiver appointed for the defunct company, 
and proposes claiming the property of the new company as the prop- 
erty of the old. We, however, think he will take no action of that 
nature, but it would not be amiss to have Bailey make some sugges- 
tions to him. 

Very truly yours, 
(Signed) GEO. CLARK. 

STANDARD OIL EXHIBIT NO. fl. 
(Copy Johnson to Clark.) 

St. Louis, Mo., June i6th, 1900. 
Hon. Geo. Clark, JVaco, Texas. 

Dear Judge.- I received Judge Gaines' letter of the i8th, which 
you so kindly sent me. Please accept my thanks for the efforts you 
made in my behalf. 

Mr. Pierce left the City a couple of days after our last return 
from Texas, and is still absent. He is expected back next week. 
Nothing will be done about Texas matters until he returns. I am 
working diligently on transfer of assets, etc., from the old to the new 
Company. I find that it involves an immense amount of trouble — 
even more labor and complications than I expected. I have the 
work well under way, and expect to complete it by the end of the 
month. 

I have been furnished from time to time with clippings from the 
Texas papers relative to the State permit granted to the nev/ Waters- 
Pierce Oil Company. They place General Smith and Mr. Hardy in 
an uncomfortable position, I fear. I hope, however, that they will 
not regret the course they took nor be prejudiced in anywise thereby. 



344 Soiator j. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

I have arranged to satisfy, at least for t/ie time being, Henry Gf 
Stribling. This is strictly confidential. 

Very truly, 

J. D. Johnson. 

STANDARD OIL EXHIBIT NO. 12. 

(Johnson to Clark.) 

St. Louis, Mc, August 2nd, 1900. 
Hon Geo. Clark, Waco, Texas. 

Dear Sir.- Your favor of the 31st ult., came this morning, and 
I have forwarded a copy of it to Mr. Pierce at Pride's Crossing, 
Mass., also to Mr. Bailey in furtherance of the policy outlined in my 
letter to you of yesterday. 

In this connection, I wish to compliment, as well as thank, you 
for the admirable manner in which you have stated the law and the 
facts relative to the granting of permit to the new Waters-Pierce 
Oil Company in reply to McFall's criticisms. 

As you can well understand, my sympathies are strongly with 
Attorney-General Smith and Secretary-of-State Hardy in the as- 
saults that have been made upon them by reason of their course in 
connection with the granting of the permit. I, however, have re- 
frained from expressing myself, directly or otherwise, fearing that 
my action in that behalf might be misconstrued and add further to 
their embarrassment. I wish, though, that you would, at your first 
opportunity, explain to them personally just how I feel about the 
matter, and that I , as well as Mr. Pierce, .stand ready to do anything 
that will be of any possible assistance or benefit to them. 

Very respectfully, 

y. D. Johnson. 

standard oil exhibit no. 13. 

(Johnson to Clark.) 

St. Louis, Mo., Nov. 12th, 1900. 
Messrs. Clark & Bolinger, Waco, Texas. 

Gentlemen: Your several favors of the 9th came this morn- 
ing. Will give the subject-matter of the same immediate attention, 
and write you regarding them to-morrow or Wednesday. 

With respect to the "confidential" one, I agree with you that it 
would not be advisable for Mr. S. [Stribling^ to come to St. Louis. 
If he prefers a conference at this time, I can meet him at some con- 
venient point; but I shall be in Waco two or three days before the 
10 prox., and if satisfactory to him I think it would be better to com- 
plete arrangements at that time. If he has talked with you regarding 
the matter or what has passed between him and myself when I was 
last in JVaco, you can repeat to him what I have said above; or if you 
think best, will write him direct under cover to you. I have met with 
ron*iderable difficulty and delay in adjusting tax bills, etc., and find 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 345 

that it will be impossible to get all of the taxes paid and receipted bills 
to you before the ten days allowed for the purpose by Judge Scott ex- 
pire. I wrote you several days ago requesting you to get an extension 
of time if possible; and not having received reply, have today wired 
you as follows: "Get ten days extension of time for paying taxes. Im- 
possible to obtain all receipts by Wednesday. Answer," which I now 
confirm. If you secure an extension of time, I shall not mail you any 
of the tax bills already sent here until I have obtained all of them. 

It has occurred to me that Judge Scott's object will be accom- 
plished by Mr. Finlav, as intervenor, giving a bond to the State in 
say $5,000 or $10,000, with Mr. Pierce and your Judge Clark — if it 
is not asking too much of him to assume the responsibility — as sure- 
ties, conditioned for the faithful payment of all State, County and 
City or Municipal taxes, both general and occupation license taxes, 
which may have been assessed against the old Company and were pay- 
able at the time of its dissolution. This would avoid the inconven- 
ience and possible embarrassment which may result from exhibiting 
or filing of tax receipts in conformity with Judge Scott's order. Won't 
you see whether such an arrangement can be made, and advise me of 
the result by wire? 

Last fall I tendered Secretary of State Hardy the State corpora- 
tion tax for the years '98 and '99. This was in connection with the 
application for a new license to the old Company. He declined to 
accept them, holding that inasmuch as the Company was precluded 
by the Austin judgment from doing business in the State, it was not 
liable for the payment at that time. Thinking it possible that inas- 
much as the Company had continued doing business after the judg- 
ment at Austin pending the appeal and supersedeas, that that tax was 
probably due, I wrote to Secretary of State Hardy, asking whether his 
Department had any claim against the old Company on account of 
that tax, and he replied that he had to the extent of $260.00. I am 
today sending him a draft for the amount, and directing him to mail 
receipt for same to you. Kindly see that it is in proper form. 

Won't you please send me, at your early convenience, a copy of the 
interplea, Thomas' demurrer, etc., to same, and our demurrer to his 
answer in the penalty suit at Waco? 

I neglected to say that I was absent from the city from the 9th until 
this morning, and hence did not get your wire of the 9th, until today. 

Yours very truly, 

J. D. Johnson. 



346 Sow tor J. JV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

STANDARD OIL EXHIBIT NO. 1 4. 

(CLARK TO JOHNSON.) 

Waco, Texas, November 15th, 1900. 
Jno. D. Johnson, Esq., St. Louis, Mo. 

Dear Sir:— We have been so closely enga-ged in Court ever since 
you were here as not to be able to keep up with our correspondence, as 
we worked from early morn until dark, and on one or uvo occasions 
after dark. We take them up now in their order. 

Answering yours of November 8th, we beg to acknowledge re- 
ceipt of check for $50.00 covering Mr. Stuart's bill, which was 
handed to Mr. S. 

With reference to the payment of taxes, we v/ired you today as 
follows: "Judge declines to take bond, says he prefers the other 
course. We will take care of receipts, letter follows," which telegram 
we beg to confirm. We suggest that you forward us all receipts in 
hand on Saturday afternoon so that we may receive them by Monday. 
If any others come in on Sunday or Monday, mail them to us as late 
as Monday evening, so that we may get them Wednesday morning, 
and do not wait to get them all. Send what you have on Saturday 
evening. JVe do not think there will be any trouble with Judge Scott 
in the matter, and we propose to get into Court before the ten days 
expire, make an exhibit of the tax receipts merely for his satisfaction, 
and then make up the judgment, reciting all the taxes have been paid. 
It might be well to accompany our remittance of the tax receipts on 
Saturday with the affidavit of Andrew M. Finlay to the efifect, that it 

is all the taxes able to get up, or of which they 

have any 

Our friend [Stribling] insists that 

the matter He will probably 

he there on Monday morning;. We have gone very lightly over the 
matter with him, and made sufrtrestions indicated by you, but without 
apparently convincing him. Of course, the matter is left with you. 
We saw Judge Scott today before sending you the telegram quoted 
above, and submitted the matter to him, and he remarked somewhat 
after this style : "I prefer the other course. I want the matter closed 
up, and do not wish to take a bond. Although you will understand 
that the bond you tender so far as security is concerned is ample; but 
I prefer that the matter should be finally closed up by the payment of 
the taxes." Evidently he had some reason for this, personal or politi- 
cal, I presume. We assume that you can make the arrangements and 
have the tax receipts here by the time indicated above. Hardy has 
never sent the tax receipts of the corporation taxes for the years 1898 
and 1899, but v/hen he does we will see that it is in proper form. We 
will have copies of the plea, Thomas' demurrer and answer, and our 
reply thereto copied and sent you as soon as we get it done. 

Answering yours of November 13th, some of which has already 
been answered herein, we beg to say that when the receipts reach us 



The Political Lijc-Story of a Fallen Idol 347 

we will see that they are not filed in court. We will submit them to 
the court, and doubtless he will not read them, and we will state to the 
court that they comprise tax receipts for all taxes that we could pos- 
sibly hear of, or such other statement as may accord with Finlay's 

affidavit. The court not of the 

proper certainly has no use for 

the 

They do not expire with the dissolution of the Company, but can be 
transferred to the new Company by regular assignment for the unex- 
pired portion of the time. 

The idea that the penalty suit was a quasi criminal case has oc- 
curred to us, and the only thing in the way is the decision of the Court 
of Civil Appeals in the Austin case, which held that it was a civil 
proceeding, contrary to all authorities previous to that time. This 
opinion of the Court of Civil Appeals, as you know, was approved by 
the Supreme Court in its refusal of a writ of error. The writer re- 
members that in revising the laws and preparing the first Revised 
Statutes of the State in 1878 to 1880, he being a member of the Com- 
mission charged with that work, the commissioners provided that ap- 
peals in the case of forfeited bail should go to the Supreme Court as 
in other civil cases. The Supreme Court decided that this revision of 
the law was unconstitutional, in that they were necessarily criminal 
cases, and would have to go to the Court of Criminal Appeals. This 
is about the attitude of the law, or rather the attitude of the decisions, 
but, as you know, decisions are not always law. What may be the 
result we can not state; but we shall certainly take the position in the 
Court of Criminal Appeals that the suit is a criminal case, and that 
therefore no appeal lies on behalf of the State. 

We believe this answers all your inquiries. We are beginning to 
work upon the indictment in the case, with a view of preparing 
proper exceptions thereto in the nature of a motion to quash and hope 
to be ready, before your arrival, with all authorities accessible. Be 
certain to come down about the 7th of December, as we ought to spend 
two or three days examining these receipts and getting ready for trial. 

Yours truly, 
(Signed) Geo. Clark. 

The blank lines in the foregoing correspondence between John 
D. Johnson, General Attorney for the Waters-Pierce Oil Company, 
and George Clark, General Attorney for the Company in Texas, 
clearly indicate that Johnson and Clark were corresponding about 
schemes of such a character as to be afraid to put ail they said in 
black and white, even in confidential letters between themselves. 



348 



Senator J. IV. Bailey of Tc.vas Unmasked 



STANDARD OIL EXHIBIT NO. 1 15. 

Stock Certificate Record Waters-Pierce Oil Company on file 
in Attorney General's office, May i, 1900, when Bailey came back, to 
Texas with "My dear Pierce" and J. D. Johnson. 

SHARES 

800 W. H. Waters, June, 1882. 
500 W. H. Waters, June, 1882. 
300 W. H. Waters, June, 1882. 
400 Chess Carley Co., June, 1882. 
400 Chess Carley Co., June, 1882. 
1,598 Trustees of 

Standard Oil Trust, June, 1882. 
I H. A. Hutchinson, June, 1882. 
I W. P. Thompson, June, 1882. 
500 H. C. Pierce, Jan., 1883. 
300 H. C. Pierce, May, 1884. 
400 Trustees S. O. Trust, 
March, 1885. 
400 Trustees S. O. Trust, 
March, 1885. 
1,597 Trustees S. O. Trust, June, 1885. 
I W. H. Tilford, June, 1885. 
I Davis S. Cowles, March, 1887. 
I H. M. Tilford, March, 1888. 
I Silas H. Payne, March, 1889. 
200 W. H. Waters, June, 1889. 
600 W. H. Waters, June, 1889. 
I W. H. Tilford, July, 1889. 
I A. M. Finlay, Feb., 1890. 
199 H. C. Pierce, Feb., 1890. 
600 H. C. Pierce, Feb., 1890. 
350 Trustees of S. O. Trust, March, 1890. 
260 H. C. Pierce, March, 1890. 
I George Gregory, April, 1890. 
W. H. Tilford, July, 1890. 
Silas H. Payne, July, 1890. 
C. M. Pratt, March, 1891. 
H. M. Tilford, March, 1891. 
C. M. Adams, Feb., 1892. 
|. P. Gruet, Feb., 1892. 
2,747 Standard Oil Co., of New Jersey, May, 1892. 
C. M. Pratt, Feb., 1899. 
J. P. Gruet, Feb., 1900. 
The "Chess Carley Co.," fourth and fifth lines above, was owned 
by Standard Oil Company. 



The Political Lifc-Story of a Fallen Idol 349 

STANDARD OIL EXHIBIT NO. 1 6. 
WATERS-PIERCE OIL COMPANY WAS NEVER LEGALLY DISSOLVED. 

"I, Henry Groll, clerk of the Circuit Court of the city of St. Louis, 
State of Missouri (the same being a court of record, having a seal), 
do hereby certify that no corporation by the name of Waters-Pierce 
Oil Company has ever made application for dissolution as provided 
for in Section 977 of the Revised Statutes of the State of Missouri of 
1899; and that no judgment of dissolution of any incorporation by 
the name of Waters-Pierce Oil Company has ever been rendered by 
any of the seven divisions of the Circuit Court of the Eighth Judicial 
Circuit of the State of Missouri, of which I am the clerk. 

"In testimony whereof I hereunto set my hand and affix the seal 
of said court, at office in the city of St. Louis, this the 20th day of 
December, 1901. 

(Seal) "Henry Groll, 

"Clerk of the Circuit Court of the City of St. Louis, Mo." 

STANDARD OIL EXHIBIT NO. 17. 

AFFIDAVIT OF H. CLAY PIERCE. 

THE STATE OF TEXAS, 
COUNTY OF TRAVIS. 

I, Henry Clay Pierce, do solemnly swear that I am president of 
the corporation known and styled Waters-Pierce Oil Company, duly 
incorporated under the laws of Missouri on the 29th day of May, 
1900, and now transacting or conducting business in the State of 
Texas, and that I am duly authorized to represent said corporation 
in making this affidavit, and I do further solemnly swear that the said 
Waters-Pierce Oil Company, known and styled as aforesaid, has not 
since the 31st day of January, 1900, nor at any day since that date, and 
is not now a member of or a party to any pool, trust, agreement, com- 
bination, confederation or understanding with any other corporation, 
partnership, individual, or any other person or association of persons, 
to regulate or fix the price of any article of manufacture, mechanism, 
merchandise, commodity, convenience, repair, any product of mining, 
or any article or thing whatsoever, or the price or premium to be paid 
for insuring property against loss or damage by fire, lightning, storm, 
cyclone, tornado, or any other kind of policy issued by the parties 
aforesaid; and that it has not entered into or become a member of or 
a party to any pool, trust, agreement, contract, combination or confed- 
eration to fix or limit the amount of supply or quantity of any article 
of manufacture, mechanism, merchandise, commodity, convenience, 
repair, or any product of mining, or any article or thing whatsoever, 
or the price or premium to be paid for insuring property against loss 
or damage by fire, lightning, storm, cyclone, tornado, or any other 
kind of policy issued by the parties aforesaid; and that it had not 
issued, and does not own any trust certificate for any corporation, 



350 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

agent, officer or employe, of for the directors or stockholders of any 
corporation; has not entered into, and is not now in any combination, 
contract or agreement with any person or persons, corporation or 
corporations, or with any stockholders or directors thereof, the pur- 
pose and the efTect of which said combination, contract or agreement 
would be to place the management or control or agreement with any 
person or persons, corporation or corporations, or with any stock- 
holders or directors thereof, the purpose and effect of which said com- 
bination, contract or agreement would be to place the management 
or control of such combination or combinations, or the manufactured 
product thereof, in the hands of any trustee or trustees, with the intent 
to limit or fix the price, or lessen the production and sale of any arti- 
cle of commerce, used or consumption, or to prevent, restrict, or di- 
minish the manufacture or output of any such article; that it had not 
entered into any conspiracy, defined in the preceding sections of this 
act, to form or secure a trust or monopoly in restraint of trade; that 
it has not been since January 31, A. D. 1900, and is not now a monop- 
oly by reason of any conduct on its part which would constitute it a 
monopoly under the provisions of Sections 2, 3, 4, 15, 6, 10 and 11 of 
this act, and is not the owner or lessee of a patent to any machinery 
intended, used or designed for manufacturing any raw material or 
preparing the same for market by any wrapping, baling or other 
process, and while leasing, renting or operating the same refuses or 
fails to put the same on the market for sale ; that it had not issued, and 
does not, for any corporation or any agent, officer or employe thereof, 
or for the directors or stockholders thereof, entered into, and is not 
now into any combination, contract or agreement with any person or 
persons, corporation or corporations, the purpose and efifect of which 
combination, contract or agreement would be a conspiracy to defraud, 
as defined in Section i of this act or to create a monopoly as defined 
in Sections 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 10 and 1 1 of this act. 

Henry Clay Pierce, 

President. 

Subscribed and sworn to before me, a notary public within and for 
the county of Travis, this 31st day of May, 1900. 

(Seal) N. M. Nagle, 

Notary Public. 



The Political Life-Story of a fallen Idol 



351 



o 
X 



Q 

< 
Q 

< 

C/3 



O 

w 

H 

H 
U 

o 

O 





in 




M 




o 




t/i 




M 






S 


^ 


o 


^J 


^ 


o 


^ 


o 


jj 


« 


ti 


4> 


I- 


a> 


u. 


u 


u 


a> 


o 


» 


O 


^ 


O 


a 


O 


a 


o 


R 


u 


,__, 


t- 


M 


CO 


r-H 


o 


"^ 


lO 


tH 


00 


> 


C5 


00 


cj 


"* 


I^ 


CO 


00 


tH 


t^ 


o 


E 


00 


M 


in 


00 


CO 


i-i 


ci 


00 


CO 


ea 




CO 


kO 


C5 


o> 


C/D 


CO 


Oi 


t- 


r— 1 


OS 


o d 


CD 


t-^ 




o 


O 


.H 


CO_ 


00^ 


o_ 


00 






cT 


CO 


oT 


co" 


ef 




o" 


1^ 


c4" 


— 1--' 


t~ 


^ 


in 


to 


-* 


Oi 


o 


o> 


r^ 


00 


a> 


^ 


.-H 


eo^ 


O 


a> 


t^ 


CO 


-t< 


Tl< 



H 


€© 




cf 


t-J" 


^ 




'-' 






CO 




CO 


o 


^ 


CO 


~o^ 


~ai~ 


m 


ea 


~"t^~ 


'^^ 




M 


t^ 


lO 


00 


CD 


CO 


m 


v-l 


Ci 


o 


•4 


CO 


eo 


CO 


^ 


CD 


o 


^ 


»-i 


-* 


o 


o 




lO 




o 


lO 


CO 


TS 


CD 


'— ' 


t- 


o 


lO 


to 


iq 


CO 

o 


O 
-t<" 


o" 


CO 

cd' 


*1 

r-T 


CO_^ 


to 


C3 




t- 


CI 


Ti* 




t- 


CO 


■^ 


CI 


M 


K 


w 




•* 


d 


CO 


tH 


CO 


T-1 


CO 


CO 


K-l 


«© 
















m 






CO 


CD 


CO 


t- 


o 


o 


"a^ 


M 


t~ 


S! 




(M 


CO 


Oj 


•^ 


in 


CO 


' — 1 


t- 


OI 


o 


CO 


ci 


o 


r-^ 


c4 


o 


CO 


CD 


CO 


1^ 


<5 


o 
o 


CO 


^ 


CO 


o 




1-1 


m 


a> 


-V 


lO 


o 


eo 




^» 


o 


^ 


^_ 


CD 


l~~ 


lO 




CO 


cf 


02 


co" 


Tt<' 


i-T 


'V 


^ 


in 


rH 


nj 


C) 


o 


o 


o 


'^ 


o 


c^ 


lO 


CO 


CO 




(M 


tH 


■*! 


CO 


CO 


<N 


CO 


1-1 


"^^ 


t- 


>< 


6© 
















^ 






,_, 


CO 


CO 


to 


00 


t- 


03 


•>* 


i-H 


M 




O 


CD 


05 


t-; 


p 


CO 


o 


1-1 


CO 


CO 


ci 


■ 


to 


^ 


CO 


•^ 


lO 


CO 


Tli 


i-H 


T-i 


o 


o 


N 


^ 


iH 


in 


iH 


o 


■<i< 


(M 


o 


o 


o_ 


CO 


CO_ 


o 


in 


t^ 


-* 


tH 


CO 


00 




lO 


co" 


^ 


lO^ 


t-^ 


t^ 


t^" 


CO 


01 


•"jT 


rt 




o 


C/D 


«H 


CO 


r-t 


•+I 


•<3< 


•Xj 


eo 


<u 


Ol 


^ 


■*! 


eo 


CO 


a 


CO 


tH 


CO 


t- 


> 


^ 
















m 


00 




•^ 


rl< 


m 


iH 


t^ 


t- 


Ol 


CO 


C/D" 




OD 


T-; 


•* 


■<j< 


IM 


CO 


CO 


00 


'— ' 


o 


.-j 


CO 


vH 


d 


e4 


in 


CO 


I^ 


1-i 


CO 


£? 


o 


CO 


00 




lO 


o 


00 


in 


lO 




t- 


o 




C3 


^. 


■^ 


CD__ 


CO 


i^ 


■<1< 


CI 


co_ 




t^ 


t-^ 


r-^ 


eo" 


in 


cf 


'^ 


d" 


-r 


pf 


ri 


CD 


W 


00 


o> 


o 


CO 


CO 


lO 


o 


t- 


J^ 




Tti 


CQ 


CO 


C4 


CO 


iH 


CO 


t- 


>^ 


ee 
















^ 





in th o o t^ 00 p 

Oi CO '-' o '— ; ^ r- 

o cd CO c4 Q efl c 

o lO in eo CO 00 I; 



CO C?5 Cl rH C^< 



5 



352 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Uiiinaskcd 

STANDARD OIL EXHIBIT NO. 1 9. 
SUMMARY AND RECAPITULATION. 

Analyzing and summarizing the above figures which were pro- 
cured from the books of the Company through a source which the 
author regards as entirely reliable, as well as the figures hereinafter 
stated, we find that the gross profits of the Waters-Pierce Oil Com- 
pany for the first five years after Bailey procured the re-entrance of 
same into Texas, amounted to $6,477,613.74; whereas their net profits 
for the same period were $3,482,892.08 on Texas business. 

To the net profit of the Waters-Pierce Oil Company, 1900 to 1904, 
inclusive, amounting to $3,482,892.08, should be added the net profit 
of the Standard Oil refineries on the billing prices to the Waters- 
Pierce Oil Company amounting to approximately $3,515,000; or an 
aggregate net profit to the Standard Oil Company on Texas business 
for the five years under consideration of $6,997,892.08. 

To this net profit made by the Waters-Pierce Oil Company in 
Texas for the five years period mentioned there should be added the 
profit made by the Standard Oil Company refineries on the billing 
prices to the Waters-Pierce Oil Company, amounting to approxi- 
mately $3,515,000. This latter sum added to the gross profits of the 
Waters-Pierce Oil Company, $6,477,613.74, gives us an aggregate of 
$9,992,613.74, being the aggregate contribution to the Standard Oil 
monopoly by the people of Texas for the five years mentioned, or a 
tax of something like $2.50 per capita on every man, woman and child 
in the State. 

Oil can be produced and refined from Texas crude oil and laid 
down at all common points in Texas at an average cost of 2^2 cents 
per gallon. The average charge per gallon to the Waters-Pierce Oil 
Company by the Standard Oil refineries from which refineries it pur- 
chased exclusively, was 7 cents per gallon for refined oil, or 100 per 
cent, profit on each sale. 

The average price for refined oil as sold to Texas dealers by the 
Waters-Pierce Oil Company was $7.25 a barrel, or 14^^ cents per gal- 
lon — a little more than 100 per cent, profit by the Waters-Pierce Oil 
Company after it had paid the Standard Oil Company 100 per cent, 
profit on each purchase from the latter company. It will thus appear 
that the average annual profits made by both the Standard Oil Com- 
pany and the Waters-Pierce Oil Company on Texas business since 
Bailey reintroduced them to the State, have been 100 per cent, multi- 
plied by as many times as they turned over their capital investment in 
Texas during each year. Is it any wonder, then, that Pierce testified 
in St. Louis, September 10, 1906, (when he was forced after having 
been arrested, to testify in a suit between he and Gruet) that the an- 
nual profits on Texas business by the Waters-Pierce Oil Company 
ranged from six to seven hundred per cent.? 

"All these figures are absolutely book records," writes the gentle- 
man who procured them for the author. They are borne out by the 



The Political Life-Story of a fallen Idol 353 

report of the Commissioner of Corporations to the President, 1907, on 
the subject of the Standard Oil monopoly in the United States. 

STANDARD OIL EXHIBIT NO. 20. 
TESTIMONY CONCERNING BAILEY'S KENTUCKY PROPERTY. 

The witness Bailey (continuing p. 947) — 

Cross-examination by Mr. Jenkins: 

Q. Senator, at the time you met Mr. Pierce in St. Louis, being 
then on your way to Washington by the way of Kentucky, you state, 
to sell some horses, have you any objection to stating the extent of 
your holdings in Kentucky at that time, what they consisted of? 

A. I did not own an acre of land, but I had a number of horses 
there, and I rented a farm there. 

Q. How long had you been in the horse business in Kentucky? 

A. Twenty years. Well, not twenty years then. I have owned 
horses there for twenty years. 

Q. Was it an extensive horse ranch there? 

A. Well, I have always had a good lot of mares there and a good 
lot of young horses. 

BAILEY WAS TOO POOR IN 19OO BUT IS ABLE NOW TO OWN KENTUCKY 
REAL ESTATE. 

He began his horse investments in Kentucky during the time he 
wasted $100,000 of trust funds for his uncle and aunt, but it remained 
for Pierce and Kirby to employ him before he was able to begin the 
purchase of real estate in and around Lexington. Then it was his 
tide of fortune turned and his richly laden "ship came home;" then it 
was he unfurled his sail upon the sea of commercial piracy and 
played the game of free hooter with the pirate trust masters. 

STANDARD OIL EXHIBIT NO. 21. 

BAILEY NOW A KENTUCKY LANDLORD. 

While Mr. Bailey began his Kentucky operations many years ago, 
the author's investigation covers only a part of his transactions there 
since he entered the Senate. The following data was procured for 
the author by a reputable Lexington attorney from the records of the 
County Clerk's office. 

Here is a list of his real estate purchases in and near Lexington, 
beginning in 1902: 

KENTUCKY PURCHASES. 
Grantor Consideration 

B. S. Gentry, Mar., 1902, 10.15 acres $ 9)io9.i8 

J. F. Curry, Dec, 1903, 132 ft. lot 10,000.00 

"J. F. Curry, Jan., 1904, 240 ft. lot 3,000.00 

r. ]. Shelby, Mar., 1904, 46.62 acres 9,180.00 

B. S. Gentry, Oct., 1904, 1.75 acres 1,280.00 



354 Senator J. II'. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

KEXTUCKY PURCHASES— CONTINUED. 
Grantor Consideration 

Shackelford, Jan., 1905, .25 acres $ 500.00 

Freeman, ct al., Nov., 1905, 150 acres 29,500.00 

Freeman, et al., Mar., 1905, 240 ft. lot 10,000.00 

S. O. Snyder, Feb., 1906, 204 acres 10,000.00 

And other valuable considerations not expressed 

This land is estimated at $250.00 per acre. 

Excess over $10,000.00 stated $41,000.00 

G. Wilson, et at., Apr., 1906, 173 (estimated) 25,000.00 

y. Richardson, June, 1906, 18.39 ^cres 3,600.00 

W. S. Payne, Klar., 1907, 165 acres 24,832.00 

71 horses, (tax list 1906), 7,250.00 

Total Kentucky Purchases since 1902 $184,251.18 

STANDARD OIL EXHIBIT NO. 22. 

WHERE DID BAILEY GET IT? 

Texas property, as per sworn testimony of J. M. 
Lindsay and W. O. Davis, (Committee Report pp. 409- 
413, 508-514) as follows: 

Kentucky property, above listed $184,251.18 

D. T. Lacy Building, bought in 1905, Gainesville, Tex.. . 8,500.00 

N. S. Rose Building, bought in 1906, Gainesville, Tex.. . . 7,500.00 

Pierre-Davis Building, bought in 1906, Gainesville. Tex. 4,000.00 

F. A. Tyler Building, bought in 1905, Gainesville, Tex. . . 10,000.00 

F. A. Potter Building, bought in 1907, Gainesville, Tex. 8,500.00 

Lassita Building, bought in 1906, Gainesville, Tex 10,000,00 

Red River National Bank Building, bought in 1904, 

Gainesville, Tex 6,500.00 

Bowmer property, bought in 1906, Gainesville, Tex 3,500.00 

Lot on Denver Street, Gainesville, Texas, bought in 1907 2,500.00 
Ed Bowmer property, Davidson and Dodson Streets, 

Gainesville, Tex 7,000.00 

Chapman Place, 2,000 acres, $6o.co, 120,000.00 

1,000 acres, sundry, 60,000.00 

Whitley & Jones Loan, 40,000.00 

Loan against Lindsay National Bank (about) 15,000.00 

Gibb's Ranch (yet on hand) 50,000.00 

Stock in Fort Worth Record, 10,000.00 

Prospective Fee from Harriman et al on sale of Tennessee 
Central Railroad, option maturing in July, 1908 (esti- 
mated) 500,000.00 

Total Visible Purchases and Holdings $1,047,251.18 



The Pulifica! Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 355 

STANDARD OIL FXHIBIT NO. 23. 

MILLIONAIRES OF THE UNITED STATES SENATE, FEBRUARY, 1908. 

A writer in the Kansas City Star submits a list of the millionaires 
in the United States Congress, basing his estimates upon, "informa- 
tion secured from members of their own State delegations and from 
other reasonably trustworthy sources." The Senate list follows: 

THE SENATE MILLIONAIRES. 

Simon Guggenheim, Colorado $60,000,000 

Isaac Stephenson, Wisconsin 30,000,000 

Stephen D. Elkins, West Virginia 25,000,000 

Nelson W. Aldrich, Rhode Island 12,000,000 

John Kean, New Jersey 10,000,000 

Redfield Proctor, Vermont 8,000,000 

Henry A. DuPont, Delaware 7,000,000 

Jonathan Bourne, Jr., Oregon 6,000,000 

Francis B. Newlands, Nevada 6,000,000 

Chauncey M. Depew, New York 5,000,000 

Geo. P. Wetmore, Rhode Island 5,000,000 

Morgan G. Bulkley, Connecticut 3,000,000 

Levi Ankley, Washington 3,000,000 

George S. Nixon, Nevada 3,000,000 

W. Murray Crane, Massachusetts 3,000,000 

Eugene Hale, Maine 3,000,000 

George C. Perkins, California 2,000,000 

Francis E. Warren, Wyoming 2,000,000 

Nathan B. Scott, West Virginia 2,000,000 

Philander C. Knox, Pennsylvania 2,000,000 

Joseph B. Foraker, Ohio 2,000,000 

Henry C. Lodge, Massachusetts 1,500,000 

Thomas C. Piatt, New York 1,000,000 

JOSEPH W. BAILEY, TEXAS 1,000,000 

Albert |. Hopkins, Illinois 1,000,000 

Thomas S. Martin, Virginia 1,000,000 

Harry A. Richardson, Delaware 1,000,000 

William Alden Smith, Michigan 1,000,000 

Frank Obadiah Briggs, New Jersey 1,000,000 

Robert L. Owen, Oklahoma 1,000,000 

Boise Penrose, Pennsvlvania t, 000,000 

Reed Smoot, Utah . . .' 1,000,000 

Total $210,500,000 



356 Sowlor J. JV. Bailey of 7\:vjs Unmasked 

STANDARD OIL EXHIBIT NO. 24. 

"PROFITS OF STANDARD OIL COMPANY STUPENDOUS/' 

New York, September 18, (San Antonio Express, September 19, 
1907.) At a judicial hearing, in New York, taking testimony on behalf 
of the Federal government, the following facts were developed: 

Profits of more than 1,000 per cent, per year are. made by the Stan- 
dard Oil Company of Indiana, a corporation sentenced to pay a fine 
of $29,240,000 by Judge Landis in Chicago. The Indiana company's 
profits for 1906 were $10,1515.82; in 1903 they were $8,7153,410, a 
total for two years' business of $18,269,492. The Standard Oil Com- 
pany of New Jersey owns 9,990 shares of the Indiana Company's 
stock. The Indiana company is capitalized for $1,000,000. The divi- 
dends paid by the Standard Oil Company of Indiana last year aggre- 
gated $4,485,500. 

HOW IT WAS DONE IN TEXAS: 

A GAME OF HIDE AND SEEK IN THIS STATE. 

Clarence G. Fay, assistant comptroller of the Standard was re- 
called today and questioned about the income on the C. M. Pratt 
Investment Company. He said the income from this source in 1902 
was $173,400, and that the money was paid over to the Standard Com- 
pany, by C. M. Pratt, who, yesterday, testified that he held stock in 
the JVaters-Pierce Oil Company of Texas for the Standard Company, 
and that the Standard Company held the stock of the C. M. Pratt 
Investment Company in lieu of the IVaters-Pierce Oil Company 
stock. Mr. Fay testified that between 1899 ^"d 1906 the stock of the 
Waters-Pierce Oil Company did not appear on the books of the Stan- 
dard Oil Company of New Jersey. In 1899 the latter company's 
stock sheet showed ownership of 2,747 shares of the Waters-Pierce 
stock, valued at $3,067,982. \li should be remembered that this ref- 
erence is to the assets of the Waters-Pierce Oil Company all over the 
southwest. It is not thought that their actual investment in Texas has 
exceeded at anv time $100,000, and that they juggled with the figures 
according to the purpose of the calculation, whether as a basis for 
taxation or to show great injury to their property interests, as the sit- 
uation might demand from time to time.] 

Charles M. Pratt, secretary of the Standard Oil Company, was 
recalled to the witness stand and told how he had held for the Stan- 
dard Oil Company the stock of the Waters-Pierce Oil Company at 
the time when it was not permitted to operate in the State of Texas. 

Mr. Pratt threw some interesting sidelights on the Waters-Pierce 
Oil Company, the stock of which was held for a long period by M. 
M. Van Buren, who was not connected with the Standard Oil Com- 
pany. Mr. Van Buren purchased the stock from Mr. Pratt and early 
this year the Standard Company bought it back. The nature of the 
transaction showed that Mr. Van Buren received from the Standard 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 357 

Oil Company exactly what he paid for the stock and that during the 
time he held it the dividends were paid to the Standard Oil Company. 

STANDARD OIL EXHIBIT NO. 2^. 

The following excerpts are taken from "Report of the United 
States Commissioner of Corporations on the Petroleum Industry, 
Part I, 1907." 

The general outline of the history of the Standard Oil Company 
is so well known as to need but little repetition. It is only necessary 
to point out certain salient facts and conclusions therefrom. 

The most important fact is that throughout the entire history of 
this concern, from 1867 to the present, throughout its various forms, 
and in spite of several purely formal reorganizations, there has been 
an absolute continuity of control by a few individuals. There has 
been apparent throughout their operations a definite, persistent policy 
of exclusive domination of the petroleum industry. 

Starting with the partnership of Rockefeller, Andrew & Flagler, 
formed in 1867, in 1870 these interests took the corporate form of the 
Standard Oil Company of Ohio, with a capitalization of $1,000,000. 
At that time they controlled not over 10 per cent of the refining busi- 
ness of the country. Within ten years from that date the process of 
combination under these interests had been so rapid that they admit- 
tedly controlled from 90 to 95 per cent, of this branch of the oil in- 
dustry, and their control of the pipe-line business had increased with 
equal rapidity. This commanding position having been gained, in 
1882 they concentrated their holdings under the Standard Oil Trust, 
which included the entire stock of 14 companies and a majority in- 
terest in 26 additional concerns. [Of which latter the W. P. O. Co. 
was one.] 

In 1892, as a result of a legal attack on this form of organization, 
the trustees announced that the trust would be dissolved, and a process 
of so-called dissolution took place. This in no way, however, afifected 
the original control of the aforesaid individuals over the entire con- 
cern, because the stocks of each of the various subsidiarv corporations 
were not returned to their original holders, but were allotted to the 
holders of trust certificates on a pro rata basis, with the result that the 
trustees, who had previously held the majority of the trust certificates, 
now held a majority interest in each one of the constituent companies. 

In 1898 contempt proceedings were started against the Standard 
Oil Company of Ohio on the ground that it had not withdrawn from 
the trust. Thereupon, pending the decision, these interests selected 
the Standard Oil Company of New Jersey as a holding corporation 
for the constituent Standard companies, and increased its common 
stock to $100,000,000 for that purpose. This company then gave its 
own stock in exchange for the stock of such companies. This change, 
like the previous one of 189'^, as was its obvious purpose, left the mo- 
nopoly power of the Standard capitalists undisturbed. The same 
group of men who had been holders of a majority of the trust certifi- 



358 Senator J. W. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

cates, then of a majority of the stocks in the subsidiary companies, 
now became holders of a majority of the stock of the controlling New 
Jersey company. 

The outstanding stock of this company is about $98,000,000. It 
controls at least 10 refining companies, 4 lubricating-oil companies, 
3 crude-oil producing companies, 13 pipe-line and other transporta- 
tion companies, 6 marketing companies, 16 natural-gas companies, 
and 15 foreign concerns, besides having close affiliations with a con- 
siderable number of other concerns, (p. XVII). 

Having thus established and maintained its monopoly of the pipe- 
line business, it has in substance refused to act as a common carrier or 
to transport and deliver oil for independent producers or to independ- 
ent refineries, and, where making any rates at all for such transporta- 
tion, has made them at least as high as the railroad rate between the 
same points, although the cost of pipe-line transportation is very much 
less. (p. XIX). [Bailey has boasted that his proposed pipe-line 
amendment to the rate bill would have affected the Standard Oil Com- 
pany adversely. As a matter of fact it afifected independent pipe-lines 
adversely because the Standard Oil Company as herein shown, "has 
refused to act as a common carrier or to transport and deliver oil for 
independent producers or to independent refineries." In other words, 
Bailey proposed adverse legislation affecting only those pipe-line 
companies ofifering to transport oil as common carriers. The Stan- 
dard has never done this.] 

WATERS-PIERCE OIL COMPANY SUPREME IN SOUTHWEST. 

An important corroboration of the evidence of the above statis- 
tics, that the Standard controls an enormous proportion of the mar- 
keting business, is found in the statistics kept by the Standard itself 
regarding that proportion. The Standard has a remarkably com- 
plete system of securing information as to the business of its competi- 
tors, partly through the observation of its own employees, and partly 
through reports of railway employes who are bribed to disclose the 
shipments of independent concerns. On the basis of such data the 
Standard compiles elaborate statements of the proportion of the mar- 
keting business which it controls. The Bureau has secured such esti- 
mate of the Standard for the territory of its subsidiary, the Waters- 
Pierce Oil Company, which includes substantially the Southwestern 
States, and for part of the South Atlantic States. According to its own 
statement, the Waters-Pierce Oil Company controlled the following 
proportions of the sale of illuminating oil in its territory rn the United 
States (the sales of the Republic Oil Company, a bogus independent 
concern of the Standard, are not included either with those of the 
Waters-Pierceor of competitors) 1892, 92 per cent; 1897,91 percent; 
1898, 90 per cent; 1899, 91 per cent; (1900 missing) ; 1901, 92 per 
cent; 1902, 92 per cent; 1903, 91 per cent; 1904, 87 per cent. The 
proportion controlled by the Waters-Pierce varied considerably in its 
different divisions. In 1906 the range was from 86 per cent in the 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 359 

South Texas division to 97 per cent in the East Texas and Louisiana 
division. In 1904 the proportion of control ranged from 76 per cent 
in the South Texas division to 95 per cent in the Arkansas division. 
Similar statistics for the control of the sale of gasoline show almost 
precisely the same percentages for the entire Waters-Pierce territory 
in the United States, the variation in the years from 1896 to 1904 being 
from 88 to 94 per cent. In some of the divisions of the Waters-Pierce 
territory the proportion of its gasoline sales during the several years 
w^as from 98 to 100 per cent of the total, (p. 19.) 

The Republic Oil Company does not have an exclusive field, but 
sells in the territory of other Standard marketing concerns. It was 
for a considerable period of time operated as a nominally independ- 
ent concern, being used to attack genuinely independent companies. 

Waters-Pierce Oil Company — This company is one of the largest 
marketing concerns in the Standard system, and is of particular inter- 
est for the reason that it was from IQOO to IQOd operated as a nom- 
inally independent company, and this despite the fact that it was 
named in the trust agreement of 1882 as being one of the group of 
concerns in which a partial interest was acquired. It was not operated 
side by side with other Standard Oil marketing concerns, but had a 
special territory of its own. This comprises an immense area in the 
Southwest, including the southern part of Missouri, all of Arkansas, 
Indian Territory, Oklahoma, Texas, and the western portion of 
Louisiana. The company also operates throughout the Republic of 
Mexico, where it has an almost complete monopoly of the products 
which it handles. 

In Mexico the Waters-Pierce Oil Company was for some time en- 
gaged exclusively in the marketing of petroleum products, but subse- 
quently it established refineries in that country, purchasing crude pe- 
troleum at the Atlantic seaboard from the Standard and transporting 
it to these Mexican plants for refining, (p. 91.) 

The Standard's marketing business in Italy is conducted through 
the Societa Italo-Americana pel Petrolio (Italian- American Petro- 
leum Company). This company also has an establishment for the 
manufacture of cans. 

In Australasia the Standard's business is mainly conducted 
through the Colonial Oil Company, a New Jersey corporation. The 
Waters-Pierce Oil Company, as already shown, operates throughout 
the Republic of Mexico, where, in fact, it has had practically no 
competition, (p. 93.) 

Equipment of Waters-Pierce Oil Company — In the recent case 
brought by the State of Missouri against the Standard Oil Company, 
the Waters-Pierce Oil Company, and the Republic Oil Company, 
the officers of the Waters-Pierce Oil Company presented a large 
amount of evidence regarding the general nature of its organization 
and business. This testimony contains valuable information as to the 
method of marketing oil. The Waters-Pierce Oil Company is the 
Standard marketing organization for the Western South Central 

1—25 



360 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

States, including part of Missouri, part of Louisiana, and all of Ar- 
kansas, Indian Territory, Oklahoma and Texas. It also does an ex- 
tensive marketing business in Mexico. In that country it has three 
refineries, but the oil which it sells in the United States is all pur- 
chased from other Standard concerns, (p. 308.) 

STANDARD OIL EXHIBIT NO. 26. 

The following interesting excerpts are taken from "Report of the 
United States Commissioner of Corporations on the Petroleum Indus- 
try. Part II:" 

SECTIONAL PRICE DISCRIMINATION. 

Prices and profits of Waters-Pierce Oil Company in its several 
divisions. — The best evidence regarding the practice of sectional dis- 
crimination is derived from records of the Waters-Pierce Oil Com- 
pany ( a Standard concern) . The evidence is conclusive because these 
records show not only the difference in price, but also the differences 
in profit among the several divisions of the company's territory. 

In 1896 the Waters-Pierce Oil Company lost 1.3 per gallon on all 
oil sold in the St. Louis division, while it made a profit of 2 cents per 
gallon in the North Texas division. This was a time of severe compe- 
tition against an independent concern in St. Louis. In the next year, 
1897, the company also lost in St. Louis, 0.1; cent per gallon while in 
the North Texas division it made J.8 cents. The prices in St. Louis 
have continued lower than in most of the other divisions of the Wa- 
ters-Pierce territory. During the first six months of 1904 the profit 
in the St. Louis division on illuminating oil averaged 0.6 cent per 
gallon, while in the other divisions it ranged 1.8 cents to 4.4 cents 
(North Texas). \Tlius the people in North Texas who have wor- 
shiped so long at the shrine of Bailey, their Standard Oil Senator,, 
have been paying the most extortionate rates of any in the country.'\ 
(P-30) 

STANDARD OIL EXHIBIT NO. 27. 

PROFITS OF THE WATERS-PIERCE OIL COMPANY. 

The Bureau has secured copies of records of the Waters-Pierce 
Oil Company, showing in detail the relation of its profits to the vol 
ume of its business and to its investment for a series of years. The 
JVaters-Pterce Oil Company is a subsidiary concern of the Standard, 
more than two-thirds of its stock having for years been owned directly 
or indirectly by the Standard Oil Trust and its successor, the Standard 
Oil Company of New Jersey. 

The capital stock of the Waters-Pierce Oil Company has for 
many years been $400,000, but it has accumulated a large surplus from 
its own earnings and invested it in extending its business, so that the 
value of its property materially exceeds its capitalization. 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 361 

Profits in Relation to Capital Stock — The following table shows 
the annual profits of the Waters-Pierce Oil Company from 1878 to 
1904, together with the amount of capital stock outstanding, the ratio 
of profits to capital stock, and the rate per cent, of dividends on capi- 
tal stock. 

Average capital (27 years) $ 366,666.67 

Total net profit (27 years) 23,225,080.19 

Average net profit per year (235 per cent, on cap- 
ital) 860,188.16 

Total dividends paid 16,685,906.69 

Average dividends per year (169 per cent, on capital) . 617,996.54 

The average capital stock outstanding for the entire twenty-seven 
years was $366,666.67 (treating the year 1878 as a complete year). 
The total net profits during this period were $23,225,080.19, or at the 
average annual rate of 235 per cent, on the capital stock. The total 
dividends paid were $16,685,906.69, or at the rate of 169 per cent, per 
year on the average. 

The table shows conspicuously the great increase in the profits of 
the Waters-Pierce Oil Company during recent years. From 188 1 to 
1888, throughout which period the capital stock was $400,000, the 
profits did not exceed 100 per cent, on the stock, while from 1900 to 
1904, they exceeded in each year 450 per cent., and in the last year 
were 698 per cent. From 1881 to 1893 the dividends never exceeded 
100 per cent., while from 1900 to 1904 they were in each year 400 per 
cent, or more reaching 600 per cent, in 1904. 

This table shows that the rate of profit of the Waters-Pierce Oil 
Company throughout the period covered has been altogether exorbi- 
tant, that it increased materially during that period. The amount of 
profits on the entire business was least in 1896, $793,575.07. The 
profit for the last complete year, 1903, \^as $2,699,818.68, while for 
the first six months of 1904 it was $2,466,838.83, or at the rate of more 
than $2,900,000 per year. 

Notwithstanding the fact that the Waters-Pierce Oil Company 
has an even more complete monopoly in Mexico than in the United 
States, its profits in that country have not usually been as high as in the 
United States, (p. 539.) 

It should constantly be borne in mind that these profits of the Wa- 
ters-Pierce Oil Company are the profits on the marketing business 
only, and do not include the profits on refining or on the pipe-line 
transportation of the crude oil entering into the products sold to the 
Waters-Pierce Company by the Standard. The profits, particularly 
on petroleum oils, are remarkably great for a marketing business. 
Independent marketing concerns, even those which do largely a tank- 
wagon business, commonly say that they are satisfied if they can make 
a profit of 25 cents a barrel, or half a cent a gallon. The profits of the 
Waters-Pierce Oil Company on sales of refined oil, gasoline, and lu- 



362 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

bricating oil have averaged fully four times that amount, and during 
some years were nearly six times, (p. 542.) 

SIBLEY A STANDARD OIL DIRECTOR. 

The Galena-Signal Oil Company, the greater part of whose stock 
is owned by the Standard Oil Company of New Jersey, furnishes 
practically all the railroads of the country with their entire supply of 
lubricants. The plant of this company is at Franklin, Pa. For a 
number of railroads the business is done through the Waters-Pierce 
Oil Company, another Standard concern, but the lubricants sold to 
them are manufactured by the Galena-Signal Company. [Page Q4 
United States Commissioner of Corporations Report of the Petroleum 
Interests, part I, shows that Jos. C. Sibley, Bailey's life-time pal, is 
a director of the Galena-Signal Oil Company.} (p. 670.) 

Proportion of Railroads under contract with Standard Concerns. 
— In this investigation the Bureau of Corporations has obtained de- 
tailed statements on the purchase and use of lubricants for rolling 
stock from 94 (91-5 Ap.) railroads, all under contract with the Ga- 
lena. Many of the statements cover the large systems of the country, 
each including a number of subsidiary lines. 

In addition to these 94 companies, there are three important rail- 
roads known to be under contract with the Galena-Signal Oil Com- 
pany, which together make up 3.5 per cent, of the locomotive and car 
mileage by all railroads. The remaining 5 per cent, covers a large 
number of small roads, most of which are known to be under contract 
with Standard concerns. A recent newspaper interview reports the 
president of the Galena-Signal Oil Company as stating that his com- 
pany has qS per cent, of the trade with railroads in the United States 
and Canada. 

BAILEY PRAISES SIBLEY. 

It seems that Joseph Sibley is the first of the Standard Oil mag- 
nates with whom Bailey became intimate, which he did early in his 
congressional career. Sibley is said to have presented Bailey with 
one or more fine horses on different occasions. In his testimony be- 
fore the whitewash committee of the Twenty-seventh Legislature 
(House Journal p. 162) Bailey voluntarily gave Sibley the following 
certificate of character: 

"My enemies have not been content to stop with dragging Mr. 
Francis, who was connected with me in a perfectly legitimate business 
transaction, into the political feuds of this State; but they have, also, 
attempted to stain the Hon. Jos. C. Sibley with their miserable accu- 
sations; although, as is shown by the letter, which Mr. Sibley ad- 
dressed to the Speaker of the House, he does not even know what the 
exact nature of the quarrel is. In his letter, he speaks of his having 
been charged with procuring my assistance for the Standard Oil 
Company, showing that he does not know enough about the matter to 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 363 

know that the controversy has arisen over the readmission of the 
Waters-Pierce Oil Company. [The two companies, doubtless, 
meant one and the same thing to Sibley.] I have known Mr. Sibley 
for several years, and I never knew a truer, or a more honest man; and 
I can not express my indignation at having him assailed before the 
country as an agent of corruption, simply because I happen to enjoy 
the honor of his friendship." 



364 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

CHAPTER XVII. 
EVIDENCE REVIEWED, ANALYZED AND DISCUSSED. 

GOVERNOR DAVID R. FRANCIS RELATES INTERESTING STORY. 

DAVID R. FRANCIS 

Ex-Governor of Mo., and President of St. Louis Exposition, a wit- 
ness for Mr. Bailey, was sworn and testified (Bailey Invest. Com. 
Report, 1907, pp. 666-707), in substance, as follows: 

Examined by Mr. Cocke: 

I met Mr. Bailey soon after he was elected. Our acquaintance 
has been as close and intimate as the distance of our residence and the 
difference of our occupation would permit. 

I knew Mr. Sibley as a member of Congress. When I first knew 
him he was a Democratic member of Congress and he is now a Re- 
publican member of Congress, as I understand. I knew him very 
well socially that is all. 

BAILEY, FRANCIS AND ST. LOUIS EXPOSITION. 

I first became connected with the St. Louis Exposition at the first 
meeting that was ever held to devise a plan for commemorating the 
one hundredth anniversary of the Louisiana Territory, and that was 
in May, 1898. 

The first favorable congressional action was an amendment incor- 
porated in the Sundry Civil bill approved June, 1900. That amend- 
ment appropriated $10,000, and pledged the government to ap- 
propriate $5,000,000 to aid in that celebration, provided in the mean- 
time the city of St. Louis secured to the satisfaction of the Secretary 
of the Treasury $10,000,000 for the same celebration that the govern- 
ment pledged $5,000,000. Congress adjourned very soon after that. 
This was in 1900. Some time in June. 

I had considerable difficulty in inducing Congress to take favor- 
able action on this proposition. The second Legislation favorable 
to the Exposition was March the 3rd or 4th, 1901 — the bill appro- 
priating $5,000,000. That was the second favorable Legislation. I 
went to Washington in February, 1904, and asked Congress for a 
loan of $4,500,000. 

Mr. Bailey said to me that he did not believe in the Government 
loaning money any way; that furthermore, he had specific objections 
to the bill because our exposition in its cattle awards had not given 
Texas any show. I said, "We will pay back the money." I finally 
said to Mr. Wortham and Senator Culberson and Mr. Bailey, "I will 
see that special awards are made for Texas cattle, exhibits to be made 
the 15th of November, and we will hang up $30,000 for that busi- 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 365 

ness." Senator Culberson asked me if I had any objection to that 
provision being made in the loan and I said no. At any rate, the 
amendment was framed, I think by Senator Culberson, met my ap- 
proval and was put in the measure. When it came up to the Senate 
Senator Culberson was asked if he had any objection to the measure 
or if his objection had been removed, and he arose and said it had been, 
as I understood him. Senator Bailey was out of the room; I was in 
the gallery watching these proceedings with great interest. Senator 
Bate, whom I knew well, and who opposed the measure on constitu- 
tional grounds, arose and went into the cloak room; just before the 
matter was to be put, the question was to be put to a vote, Mr. Bailey 
emerged from the cloak room with Senator Bate, and spoke against 
the measure. That started a debate which continued from two to 
five days. After a while the measure was passed; I was delighted 
that it was passed and I was very much provoked at Senator Bailey for 
his opposition. I will tell you the truth, I don't know that that had 
anything to do with this, but that possibly estranged us for six or 
eight months — we didn't meet so often. I felt that his opposition 
was too active, he ought to have voted against it if he wanted to. 

Q. Did he make any speeches against it the first time? 

A. No. No, there was no talking on it the first time, it was 
simply an amendment to the Sundry Civil Bill. That is when the 
$10,000 was first appropriated and a pledge given for $10,000,000. 
[In other words Bailey was not willing to have the government loan 
the Exposition $4,500,000, although Francis had secured his silent 
acquiesce, so to speak, in an absolute donation of $10,000,000 and the 
fact that Governor Francis thought he was entitled to Bailey's silence 
is clearly shown in the foregoing statement by him to the efifect that 
they became "estranged for six or eight months."] 

Q. When did you speak to Mr. Bailey with reference to his at- 
titude towards your exposition in the matter of its legislation? 

A. When I first went to Washington I spoke — 

Q. When was that? 

A. Well, I first went there on the 22nd of February, 1899. I 
remember that because on that day the exposition projectors organiza- 
tion had been formed at that time, gave a dinner at the Arlington to 
all of the members of Congress, both Senate and House, from the Lou- 
isiana territory, and I presided at the dinner. Although I do not re- 
member specifically talking to Senator Bailey, I must have done so 
because I had talked to every member of each house whom I met who 
would listen to me. 

Q. Do you remember, Governor, of having talked to him spec- 
ifically thereafter during that year? 

A. Oh, yes; I met him, gentlemen, I talked to him a number of 
times and reasoned with him, this will benefit Texas, and this be- 
longs to our section of the country and you must not oppose it, but I 
never had any influence with him. 

Q. That you wanted to have? 



366 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

A. That I wanted to have, no. 

Q. Well, you undertake to say that you did not have some influ- 
ence with him. Governor? 

A. Well, I will undertake to say that I had no influence with 
him other than what any man would feel, just a hesitation to openly 
fight what a personal friend is very much interested in, but I never 
could induce him — 

I don't remember when my financial transactions with him be- 
gan. The first record that I can find in the copy book of any finan- 
cial transaction with him or any statement was in July, 1900, but I 
know I had financial transactions with him before that. I deeded the 
land to Barnett Gibbs on the loth day of July, 1900. My first conver- 
sation with Bailey on the subject of this land deal began the latter 
part of '99 or the early part of 1900. [That was while Francis was 
in Washington trying to secure favorable congressional action for 
the St. Louis Exposition.] 

A FAMOUS HORSE DEAL. 

Mr. Bailey and I bought a horse — I think that was in 1899. Mr. 
Bailey wrote me he had bought a horse for us jointly, and he had 
drawn on me for one-half the cost or the whole cost. I never heard 
the name of the horse. I never knew from whom he bought it. I 
think the price was $1,200 or $i,i;oo. I don't know what became of 
the horse. To the best of my recollection it was either in '99 or the 
very early part of 1900. 

Q. Well, it may or may not be material — did that amount to a 
loan. Governor, the draft that was drawn on you and afterwards re- 
turned, did it amount to a loan? 

A. No, sir; it didn't amount to a loan. 

Q. Did you ever get a bill of sale for that half horse? 

A. No, I didn't need a bill of sale for it. 

Q. Did he consult you about buying the horse before he bought 
him? 

A. No. 

I want to say to you, sir, that Mr. Bailey wrote me that he had 
bought a horse for our joint account and he had drawn on me and I 
can't remember today whether it was half the purchase price or all 
the purchase price. I paid the draft and wrote him that I had 
enough horses and that was all right, but I didn't think I wanted any 
more, and he wrote back something which I do not recall. It was a 
matter I didn't think of. 

Q. The first intimation you had of going in the horse business 
with him was the fact of his drawing a draft on vou? 

A. He may have talked about it before, he may have talked 
about buying a horse jointly with me, something of that kind, I don't 
remember whether he did or not. 

Well, I can find out for you and when you are in St. Louis next 
week I will furnish you the information if you think it is relevant. 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 367 

Q. Well, its relevancy or irrelevancy depends upon a man's view, 
and theory of this case, whether it is the loan theory or otherwise and 
whether these loans affected legislation. 

A. Well, it was not a loan. I want that understood. I did not 
consider it a loan to Mr. Bailey; I consider I had paid half the pur- 
chase price oi that horse and that I owned half the horse, that is what 
I considered it. 

Q. But, now, you say you don't know but what you may have 
paid the whole price? 

A. Well, I may have done so, I don't remember, but if I did he 
owed me the other part. 

Q. Oh, I see. 

Q. Now, Governor, do you remember Mr. Bailey's attitude to- 
wards the appropriations for the benefit of the Chicago Exposition? 

A. No, I do not. I was in Washington attempting to secure 
that exposition for St. Louis and when it was fixed at Chicago I took 
no further interest in the Legislation. 

Q. Don't you know as a matter of fact. Governor, and didn't you 
know at that time? 

Mr. Wolfe : What has that to do with this? 

The Chairman: Not a thing. 

Mr. Wolfe: Let it go. 

Q. At the time you were seeking to get your enterprise en- 
dorsed by Congress that Bailey had been violent in his opposition to 
legislation to aid the Chicago Exposition? 

A. No, I did not, but if I had known it I would simply have 
gone to Mr. Bailey and asked him for his aid in the Louisiana Expo- 
sition. 

Q. Governor, before we leave entirely the legislative legislation 
in favor of your exposition, I want to ask you if it isn't true that 
shortly after you returned to St. Louis and favorable action of Con- 
gress towards your exposition, that in the Globe-Democrat you came 
out in an interview to the effect that the credit for such Congressional 
action was due more to Joseph Sibley and J. W. Bailey than any 
other members of Congress? 

A. I don't think I could have made such a statement, because it 
wasn't true. I don't see — 

Q. Well, do you deny you gave out such an interview at the 
time? 

A. I do not deny that the paper published it, but I deny that I 
said at any time that Mr. Joseph Bailey and Mr. Joseph Sibley were 
more instrumental in securing favorable action than any other mem- 
bers of Congress. 

Q. What did you say about them and their attitude? 

A. I don't remember what I said about them and their attitude. 

Q. Well, do you regard Mr. Bailey's failure to actively oppose 
your measure as conducive to its passage? 

A. His failure to oppose it as conducive to its passage? 



368 Senator J. W. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

Q. I mean to oppose it aggressively. 

A. Yes, sir; to the extent any man of equal ability and influence 
by active opposition could have placed opposition in the way to the 
passage of the measure. I don't know whether he opposed that ac- 
tively in the House or not. 1 know he did not support it, and I never 
could induce him to support it. 

Yes, sir; I was president of the enterprise and devoted six years 
of my time to it, and gave fifty or sixty thousand dollars of my money 
without getting a cent back and expecting nothing, either directly 
or indirectly, except the general increase of values of the country and 
throughout St. Louis like everybody enjoyed. Of course, that might 
be injecting a stump speech into it — 

Q. Well, I might reply to that, Governor, about the rumors I 
heard about some accounts. 

A. Well, you will not make that insinuation here, either. I want 
to be protected here, and if I can't be I will protect myself. And I 
say this, those accounts have been examined time and time again by 
expert accountants and submitted to the government. 

Q. It isn't customary for a witness' testimony — 

A. It isn't customary for such slurs to be made as that either. 

Mr. Wolfe: I object to it, and I ask the Chairman to put a stop 
to it. 

The Chairman: I have been trying to do it ever since we began 
this meeting, but I haven't been able to. 

$100,000 GIBBS RANCH DEAL. 

The Witness Francis: I did assist Mr. Bailey to buy the ranch 
sometime during the latter part of 1899 or the first part of 1900. 
Mr. Bailey said to me that he had an opportunity to buy a very valu- 
able tract of land near Dallas, Texas, and he wished me to join him 
in the purchase. I replied that I would like to do so but I was, at 
that time, very much spread out in a number of enterprises and in the 
next place I already had as much land in Texas as I cared to own. 
It was 27,000 acres in Pecos county and about 56,000 in Clay county. 
He thereupon suggested that he could use that land, or some of it, in 
the purchase of the Gibbs ranch. "Well," I said, "That is rather at- 
tractive. I have no objection to doing that. Whether I go into this 
ranch purchase with you or not you may use this land, I will deed it 
to you, or to anybody you designate, as part of the purchase price of 
the Gibbs ranch." [Remember that Francis was trying to induce 
Bailey to support his World's Fair legislation and if not to support it, 
to at least, refrain from aggressively opposing it as Bailey had op- 
posed the donation to the Chicago exposition.] 

I find, upon looking over my papers after deciding to come here, 
that I did deed that land to Barnett Gibbs some time in June, 1900. I 
only know that Mr. Bailey bought the Gibbs ranch; that it was 
deeded to me; that I gave him the use of the ranch in Pecos county; 
that in order to secure me he had the Dallas county land deeded to me. 



The Political Life-Story of a Pallen Idol 369 

It was previous to April, 1900, but how long I cannot recall, that Sen- 
ator Bailey, then Congressman Bailey, began to talk to me about the 
purchase of the Dallas county ranch. I simply said to him you can 
use the land. 

Mr. Bailey and I had long conversations whenever we met, on 
various subjects. We would talk politics and we would talk business, 
and he said that he was negotiating for or could buy, I don't know 
which, a large ranch from Barnett Gibbs near Dallas, Texas, and he 
wanted me to join him in buying it, I mean take an interest, and I did 
not say I would not in the beginning. 

I told him then, I think when we had the first conversation, if I 
didn't go in with him in this, I will let you put the land in. 

It was previous to April, because I will tell you why I recall it. 
I recall it in this way, that I would not have presumed to wire Bailey 
to come to St. Louis if I had not felt that I had offered to do him a 
kindness and that our relations were justified, so it must have been 
previous to April. That is the only reason I can give for it. 

[From this it would appear that Francis himself recognized the 
fact that he did have some claim on Bailey and that claim was based 
upon his proferred financial assistance to Bailey while seeking the lat- 
ter's congressional influence. It is evident from Francis' own 
words that he would not have introduced him to Pierce except for the 
fact that their "relations were justified." Francis knew his man, 
knew what Pierce needed, to-wit: as Johnson expressed it, "A lawyer 
possessing personal and political influence."] 

FRANCIS AS A GO-BETWEEN. 

The witness Francis: I saw Senator Bailey in St. Louis in 
April, 1900. I may have seen him elsewhere, I don't remember, but 
I know I wired him to come to St. Louis at that time — between the 
20th and 25th of April, 1900. 

Q. Do you know whether or not he was then already on his way 
to St. Louis? 

A. No, I do not. I only know this, that I wired to Washington 
to Senator Bailey to come to St. Louis, I wished to see him. His 
secretary or some one there wired me that Mr. Bailey, not Senator 
then, was in Gainesville. I thereupon wired him in Gainesville to 
come to St. Louis. He replied he would be there at a certain day on 
his way to Washington. He arrived, I don't remember the day of 
the month, but I know that on the same day he arrived I was com- 
pelled to leave to fill an engagement I had made at Houston, Texas, 
to attend the Trans-Mississippi Commercial Congress, which met 
there in April, 1900, and I think it met April 30th. 

My object in wiring Mr. Bailey to come to St. Louis was to intro- 
duce him to Mr. Pierce. 



370 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

PIERCE LN TROUBLE IN TEXAS. 

Mr. H. C. Pierce has lived in St. Louis about as long as I have. 
I went to St. Louis in 1886 when 1 5 years of age, and went to school 
for four years, and then went into business. When I first knew of Mr. 
Pierce he was in St. Louis in some bank, I have forgotten what bank 
it was — it afterwards went out of business. We were not in the same 
business. We met each other very seldom. In the course of time 
the Waters-Pierce Oil Company was formed. I knew Mr. Waters 
and I knew Mr. Pierce, but did not know cither one of them very well, 
both older men than myself. Mr. Pierce might deny that today, but 
it is true. I never had any business relations with them of any kind, 
but I suppose dating from about 1880 I had social relations with Mr. 
Pierce, mainly through our both being members of the same clubs. 
During the latter part of the nineties Mr. Pierce was president of the 
St. Louis Club, a social organization of that city, and I was first vice- 
president. We built a new club house, the one now occupied by the 
club, and both being on the building committee, we were thrown more 
or less together. We also belonged to two country clubs of limited 
membership one of fourteen members and one of twenty members, 
and in that way we knew each other socially very well. I never had a 
business transaction with him in my life that I recall now, not up to 
the present time even. Some time in April, 1900, he 'phoned to my 
office to know if he could see me. I replied yes, and he came down 
He said, "I have trouble, the Waters-Pierce has had or is having 
trouble with the State of Texas," and he said, "The lawyers that I 
have don't seem able to accomplish what I want, don't seem able to 
help the situation, and I want you to recommend some Texas lawyer 
to me." I says, "What is your trouble?" Well, he must have told 
me but I do not recall it. "Well," I said, "If I wanted a lawyer in 
Texas, I would get Joe Bailey." He says, "What, that politician?" 
I says, "You may call him a politician or not, but he is a lawyer; he 
may be a good politician, too, but he is a good lawyer." Well, after 
talking some few minutes longer, he asked me if I could bring Bailey 
to St. Louis. I said, "I think so; I will try." I then wired to Wash- 
ington and when advised that he was in Gainesville, I wired Gaines- 
ville, and he replied he would be there on a certain day on his way 
to Washington. I told Mr. Pierce Mr. Bailey would arrive on a cer- 
tain day, but I had to leave that same day, and I either gave Mr. 
Bailey a letter to Pierce or Mr. Pierce a letter to Mr. Bailey. I left 
about noon on that day, according to my recollection, and I saw Mr. 
Bailey a few minutes before he arrived, I mean before I left. I don't 
recall whether I went to Mr. Pierce's office with Bailey or not. At 
any rate I was the cause of their getting together, and that is all I know 
about it. I believe he [Bailey] did tell me that he told Pierce the 
only way he could come back into Texas was to disband the old Com- 
pany and organize a new one. I think he told me that very soon after 
he was down here at Austin the first time. 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 371 

GOVERNOR FRANCIS FATHERS THE RE-INTRODUCTION OF THE WATERS- 
PIERCE OIL CO. 

Q. Now, Governor, in your examination in chief, you assured 
the committee you had no part or parcel in the influence if any pro- 
cured by the Waters-Pierce Oil Company in its reintroduction in 
Texas? 

A. I did. I reaffirm it. 

Q. That I apprehend is a conclusion of yours, and while you 
doubtless felt that way about it as you do not — 

Mr. Hanger: Now, I object to this man lecturing here. If he 
has a question let him ask it. He has no right to subject him to an ar- 
gument. 

The Chairman: Ask the question. 

Q. Governor, I am trying to put a legitimate question as I appre- 
hend and I think' this record will bear me out that there are more 
stump speeches and harangues coming from the other side of this in- 
vestigation than from us. 

The Chairman : Just ask your question. 

Mr. Hanger: We will discuss that later. 

Q. Well, lets leave that now. I was going to ask you. Gover- 
nor, despite these expressions we have just gone over, if it is not a fact 
that you was the immediate agent between Mr. Pierce and his com- 
pany and their troubles and whatever influence, whether legitimate 
or illegitimate, that was brought to bear in the settlement of these 
troubles in Texas? 

A. I was only agent to the extent of introducing Mr. Bailey to 
Mr. Pierce and Mr. Pierce to Mr. Bailey. 

Q. Then, if it was through Mr. Bailey's influence, political or 
legal, legitimate or illegitimate, that thing was obtained, to that ex- 
tent you did participate in the re-introduction of the Waters-Pierce 
Oil Company into Texas? 

A. To the same extent that I would be in the crying of a boy 
whom I begot. 

Q. I don't think it is material — now you deeded this land to 
Governor Gibbs in July after you had these negotiations with Mr. 
Bailey through the winter of 1900? 

A. In 1899 and 1900, yes, sir. 

Q. Now, Governor, you say that when Mr. Pierce talked to you 
in April, you wired Mr. Bailey? 

A. Yes, sir; April, 1900. 

Q. Yes, sir? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Can you tell the committee in substance what was in that 
telegram? 

A. No, I can not, I can furnish the committee a copy of it, 
though. 

Q. Do you mean after you return home? 



372 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

A. I think all the telegrams stated, come to St. Louis at once; 
wish to see you on important business. 

I think he came to my office. My recollection is that I did go 
with him to Pierce's office, but I won't say that. I remember it was 
raining very hard that day and whether I went with him to Pierce's 
office, I don't know. I don't recall definitely but if I did go with him 
to Pierce's office, I did not participate in the conversation more than 
a minute or two because I was preparing to leave the city, and I left 
that noon. 

PIERCE AND FRANCIS DISCUSS BAILEY AND RESULTS. 

The Witness Francis: It must have been some time afterwards 
that I talked with Mr. Pierce [again] about his troubles in Texas, and 
Mr. Bailey — it must have been some months. I forget whether 
Pierce brought up the subject or I did, but he said to me that "Your 
friend Bailey is a very able man." And I said to him, "I told you he 
would be." He made some remark then about Bailey going to Austin 
with him — but this was in a social gathering where there was a half a 
dozen men and I never had any private conversation with Mr. Pierce 
on the subject. This was a desultory conversation in a company of 
five or six men. 

Q. Was anything said in that conversation or any other conversa- 
tion had during that time by Mr. Pierce, about Mr. Pierce having 
loaned Mr. Bailey any money? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. What was said about Mr. Pierce? 

A. Mr. Pierce said Mr. Bailey had loaned him money, I mean 
said he had loaned Mr. Bailey some money. 

Q. Uh-huh? 

A. Told me so at that time, at that conversation; that is the only 
time he ever did mention it to me. 

Mr. Bailey directed me to pay him. 

Q. Did Mr. Bailey give you the money to pay him with? 

A. I don't know whether he did or not — I don't know whether 
he did or not, but it wouldn't have made any difference whether he 
did or not, I should have paid him if he had told me to. 

Q. Loaned him the money? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Did you have any talk with Mr. Bailey about this loan, be- 
tween the time it was made and the time you paid it? 

A. No, I did not, and I never knew that Pierce had loaned Bai- 
ley any money until Pierce told me. 

Q. And that must have been in the interim? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Of its loaning until your payment of it? 

A. That was between April 27th and November 22, 1900; Pierce 
told me in this conversation I am talking about, in the presenre of four 
or five, six or seven. 



The Political Life-Story of a fallen Idol 373 

Q. Who were the men? 

A. I can not recall who they were. 

Q. None of them? 

A. It was in one of these clubs. 

Q. None of them? 

A. No, I can't recall none of them. Pierce said, "1 loaned 

Bailey some money." I will tell you the conversation : 1 said, "How 




going to let Bailey do all the work for nothing, are you?" He says, 
"Bailey borrowed some money of me," and he gave me the amount 
then, but I do not recall it, I did not recall it until I looked at my let- 
ter book a few days ago. It was a great surprise to me, because I 
didn't know Bailey borrowed any money from him. When Pierce 
told me that he had made Bailey a loan I dropped the subject with 
him. There were five or six other men present. 
Q. You didn't like it? 
A. No, I didn't like it. 
Q. It didn't look good, did it? 

A. Well, I didn't want Pierce to tell it before five or six other 
people, I didn't want him to tell it, it wasn't very business like. What 
I was doing was guying Pierce about letting a man work for him and 
not paying him, and I said: "This whole thing is charged up to me 
and I don't propose to be left in that position, and you ought to pay 
this man." I didn't say it in those words, but I said: "You are not 
going to let this man do all this work for nothing, are you?" Now I 
want to tell you about Mr. Pierce. I have known him for a long time, 
I don't think I have seen Pierce three times in six years. Mr. Pierce 
was director in the exposition from its organization in March, 1901. 
He never has attended a meeting of the Board of Directors from that 
time to this. 

Q. Is it possible that after your castigation or your jeering of 
Mr. Pierce — 

A. Well, I would call it a tilt, Mr. Cocke. 

Q. Well, put it as mild as you like. 

A. It was guying, as it were. 

Q. That Mr. Pierce, in order to straighten the matter up with 
you and carry out his plans with Mr. Bailey, took that money and 
gave it to Mr. Bailey and had him give it to you to be returned to Mr. 
Pierce, in order to take up that note? 

Mr. Wolfe : I just believe I will object to that. 

The Chairman: He is asking if it is possible, it is not a proper 
question. 

A. No objection to answering it, it is ridiculous to me. 

Q. I think the other testimony justifies it. 

Mr. Wolfe : I don't think it is competent. 

The Chairman: You are asking if it is possible. 



374 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

Mr. Robertson : If he knows that to be a fact. 

A. No, I have no reason to believe it at all. 

Mr. Robertson: I would like to ask the witness one question 
right there; you say, Governor, that you are not able now to state 
where or from what source you received that money that was paid, or 
whether you paid it out of your own funds? 

A. No, I can not; that's right. 

No, not for that purpose beforehand, but it does show this, that 
either I had that money in my possession at that time belonging to 
Mr. Bailey or I advanced him the money and it was subsequently paid 
to me. That is what that statement shows. 

Q. Your records do not show it came back to you? 

A. No, none of the records show where it came from. 

Q. They don't show where it came from or where it went back 
to? 

A. No, sir; they do not. 

Q. They only show that you were the medium by which the sum 
of $4,800 reached Mr. Pierce for the account of Mr. Bailey? 

A. Yes, sir; that's what it shows, that's what it does show. 

Q. Kindly refer to that letter again, returning the money to 
Pierce. 

A. Yes, sir, November 22, 1900. 

Q. What is the next letter where you wrote Mr. Bailey? 

A. Oh, I wrote Mr. Bailey that same day seven pages further on. 

Q. Now, you had read down to the receipt and voucher, now, I 
want you to refer to the next language there after that. 

A. Yes, sir — "which the voucher designates as 'a demand loan.' " 
Demand loan is quoted — "and your sight draft on him dated Gaines- 
ville, Texas, June 13, 1900, for $1,500." That is the end of the par- 
agraph, of the sentence and paragraph. 

M r. Robertson : Is that dated Gainesville, Texas? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Robertson: June 13th? 

A. June 13, 1900. 

Q. Sight draft? 

A. Sight draft on Pierce, individually. 

Q. By Bailey? 

A. By Bailey, that is what this shows, this says. 

Q. Dated Gainesville, Texas, June 13th? 

A. 1900, that's right, that's right. I have no recollection of it 
whatever, other than this. I don't remember or recall a thing about 
it. 

Q. You are in the same attitude on that as you are with reference 
to the demand loan and receipt or voucher? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Do those records disclose any further? 

A. The records I have with me do not. I have looked all through 
this book to find out what authority I had to pay this $4,800 and if I 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 375 

don't find any I conclude Bailey must have given me those instruc- 
tions verbally. 

Q. Do you remember Mr. Bailey being there in St. Louis in 
November, 1900? 

BAILEY SAID HE PRACTICED INFLUENCE FOR PIERCE. 

The Witness Francis : 

Q. Well, this canceled check for $4,800, if you find it for us in 
St. Louis, won't disclose the source of the fund? 

A. Oh, no. It will simply show I drew a check against my pri- 
vate bank account f jr $4,800. I can find that easily and I will send 
you that, give you that in St. Louis if you wish. 

Q. Well, the committee will be there next week — now, in this 
conversation you had with Mr. Pierce, the first one, when he tele- 
phoned you in April, 1900, did he go over with you somewhat in de- 
tail the need, that is, the necessities, his necessities and the necessities 
of his company? 

A. I don't think he did, because — 

Q. Did he say anything to you about Rockefeller and that 
crowd being under indictment at Waco along with himself? 

A. Not that I recall, at all, not that I recall. 

Q. Well, did you recommend Mr. Bailey to him for his legal 
ability or for his political services and influences? 

A. I recommended him for his legal ability; I did not — 

Q. But Mr. Bailey told you afterwards he considered it a mat- 
ter of influence? 

A. Well, he told me he didn't feel he could charge him anything 
for that, but that was influence, and he didn't practice influence. 

Q. Did you know that — were you acquainted with Judge Clark 
of this State at that time? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Mr. Pierce told you he had exhausted all the legal power that 
he had employed in an effort to stay in Texas? 

A. Well, he didn't say exhausted, exactlv, but he said those fel- 
lows didn't seem able to do what he wanted done, he wanted some- 
body else. I don't remember that he told me what the trouble was, al- 
though he might have done that, too. 

Q. How long did he — can you remember how long he remained 
in your office at that time? 

A. Oh, no, but it must have been half an hour, or may have only 
been fifteen minutes, I don't remember. He telephoned me to know if 
he could see me if he came down. I don't remember that he has been 
in my office since, or I in his. 

A. Yes, sir. 

Senator Looney: You were asked a question a while ago, the in- 
timation being this $4,800 might possibly have been paid by Mr. 
Pierce to Mr. Bailey and Mr. Bailey to you, and you back to Mr. 



376 Senator J. W. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

Fierce again — now, I want to ask you if you would have permitted 
yourself to be used in any such subterfuge as that? 

A. No, sir, not knowingly. I have told you all I know about 
the payment of that $4,800. I was perfectly astounded when I saw 
yesterday I had paid it, and have looked through these books to find 
out by what authority I had paid it, and I could not find out any way. 

JOE SIBLEY AGAIN. 

Mr. Sibley told me that he voted for the World's Fair appropria- 
tion. 

Q. Do you know anything about Mr. Sibley's alleged oil con- 
nections? 

A. No. 

Q. You have no personal knowledge of them? 

A. No, I didn't know he was suspected of being — 

Q. It is in the record here that he is an oil man, and a Standard 
Oil man at that. 

ED BUTLER, THE ST. LOUIS GRAFTER. 

The witness Francis : 

Q. You know Mr. James Campbell of St. Louis? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Have you had any business transactions with him, that in- 
volved Mr. Bailey's action in any way? 

A. No, no, none at all. Never had any business relations with 
Campbell that involved — 

Q. Do you know whether he and Pierce were intimately in- 
volved in business? 

A. No, I do not. I have heard each of them accuse the other, 
talking with me. I don't know whether there is any business relations 
or not — of course, I don't want that put in the record either. 

Q. Did you ever know of any alleged backing by Mr. Campbell 
to furnish the famous Ed Butler, of St. Louis, financial assistance? 

A. No, I didn't know of any backing Campbell furnished But- 
ler. I didn't think Butler needed any financial backing. Campbell 
is amply able to furnish any backing. He is a rich man. 

FRANCIS' BUSINESS CONNECTIONS. 

Mr. Bailey never did any legal service for me that I recall, in any 
way. I was interested in the Tennessee Central Railroad to a very 
little extent, and I was always sorry 1 was. I heard Mr. Bailey had 
been employed by the manager of the property, the man who owned a 
large control, but he never represented me any since that I talked to 
him about it at all. He never had anything to do with any letters, any 
litigation, which brought him in actual touch with me. I am not a 
lawyer myself. 

Q. Governor, what business are you engaged in? 

A. Well, I am engaged in a good many kinds of business just 
now, and I may say five years, 1901 to 1906 all my time and attention 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 377 

was given to the St. Louis Exposition. During that time I was at the 
same time interested in the house in St. Louis which I founded in 
1877, Francis, Brother & Company, which deals in grain, bonds and 
stocks. I am the senior member of that house — the business is run by 
my son. I devote a good deal of my time every day to the two financial 
institutions in St. Louis in which I am a director and whose meetings 
I attend daily. I am furthermore interested in a number of buildings 
in St. Louis, office buildings and so forth and I dabble in real estate, 
and I build railroads, electric and steam, buy them and sell them as a 
dealer and on commission, and most any kind of an enterprise that is 
brought in. I think I am considering now buying three or four hun- 
dred acres of land with two or three hundred houses on it. I have an 
electric road on the east side of the river, in which I am a director and 
largely interested, and I am employed to a greater or less extent now 
in building a steam railroad from Joplin, Missouri, to Helena, Arkan- 
sas, and a good many other things that I am interested in that I 
cannot recall just at the moment. 

I am nominally a director in two railroad companies, I am vir- 
tually a director in one. By nominally, I mean that my name is on 
the board of directors of the St. Louis, Kansas City and Colorado 
Railroad, which is the St. Louis-Kansas City connection of the Rock 
Island system. I sold that road to the Rock Island people in 1902. 
They have kept up their legal organization and I am one of their di- 
rectors. I am also a director, but only own about five or ten shares of 
stock in the branch of the Chicago and Alton, which goes through 
Missouri from Kansas City to Louisiana. I am really a director 
in the Missouri and North Arkansas Railroad, in as much as 
I have a good deal to say about its policy and construction. That is a 
road which has 126 miles of road running now from Seligman, 
Arkansas, in a southeasterly direction to Leslie, Arkansas, and so we 
are extending it to the Mississippi River on the east and to Joplin on 
the west. I am also a director in an electric road, in the East St. Louis 
and Suburban, which owns 171; miles of track running through East 
St. Louis, Granite City, Venice, running to Alton, Bellville, Illinois, 
Lebanon, and so forth. Those are all the railroads that I recall just 
now that I am a director in. I am a director in a number of other cor- 
porations, banks, trust companies, insurance companies, and so forth — 
not a number of others, three or four others. 

SOME INTERESTING CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN CLAY (PIERCE) , DAVID 
(FRANCIS) AND JOE ("COAL OIL JOE"). 

The following interesting correspondence between David R. 
Francis, H. Clay Pierce and Joseph W. Bailey, as per Francis' letter 
copybook, will be found in the Bailey Invest. Com. Report, 1907, pp. 
680-694. 



378 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

FROM FRANCIS TO PIERCE. 

St. Louis, August 17, 1900. 
"Mr. H. Clay Pierce, Pride's Crossing, Mass. 

"Dear Clay — I regret and am somewhat surprised, that you did not see me before 
leaving St. Louis for the East. 

"Our friend Bailey, it appears, has been violently attacked in Texas for his 
efforts in your behalf. In a letter from him today, in reply to one I wrote him, stat- 
ing I would hold myself subject to his command, and if he desired would go to Texas 
in order to defend him against malicious and unjust charges, he writes that he is able 
to take care of himself 'against the miserable wretches who are so desperately trying 
to destroy (him) me.' He says he will be here tomorrow. 

"He writes he has charged you no fee, nor does he say he proposes to do so, 
continuing to attribute his entire action in the matter to friendship for me. You 
can readily see how this embarrasses me, and how difficult it becomes for me to fail 
to readily compjy with any request he may make. I have no suggestion to make 
in this connection at this time, but write this letter mainly for the purpose of impress- 
ing upon you the position in which you have placed me. I told Bailey he should 
charge you a fee, because it was far from my intention to involve him in any trouble 
or inconvenience, to say nothing of the political embarrassment, when I asked that 
he look after your interests, in his State. 

* * * (This part of the letter is omitted as it does not pertain to the matters 
in question.) 

"Respectfully, 

D. R. Francis." 

From the above letter to "Dear Clay" it will be observed among 
other things that Francis wanted to avoid the embarrassment and diffi- 
culty of failing "to readily comply with any request he { Bailey) may 
make." Perhaps David R. was fearful that Bailey would strike him 
for a loan or require of him a purchase of another $100,000 ranch. 
Of course, it is impossible to tell just what Francis meant but it is evi- 
dent he did not want to have his "friendship account" with Bailey 
charged up with so important and so valuable a service as that ren- 
dered by Bailey to Pierce. Of course, Bailey was playing Francis 
false, up to that juncture, by not telling him that Pierce had paid him 
a fee in the nature of a loan. 

LETTER FROM FRANCIS TO PIERCE. 

"November 22, 1900. 

"Mr. H. Clay Pierce. City: 

"Dear Sir — I enclose my personal check for $4,800 payable to your order, m 
exchange for which please send me by bearer J. W. Bailey's receipts or due bills 
given you for like amount. I understand this to be the total of Mr. Bailey's obliga- 
tions to you. If it is not so, please advise me. 

"Yours truly, 

"D. R. Francis." 

LETTER FROM FRANCIS TO BAILEY. 

The following letter from Francis to Bailey just at the time that 
Stribling was in St Louis and all the financial and legal matters con- 
nected with the re-admission of the Waters-Pierce Oil Company to do 
business in Texas were being settled and adjusted, discloses the fact 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 379 

that the draft for $1,500, which Bailey had so long and so vehemently 
denied, was, in fact, forwarded to him along with his "receipt of 
April 2c;th, 1900, for $3,300," in order, doubtless, that Bailey might 
have in his possession the signatures that up to that time he had out- 
standing with Pierce or the Waters-Pierce Oil Company. In other 
words, they had followed the adverse criticism in Texas during the 
summer and were evidently preparing to obliterate any incriminating 
evidence that carried Bailey's signature on it. Ex-Senator Hanger 
was conducting the examination of Governor Francis, on behalf of 
Bailey in Odell's absence, and he did not seem to appreciate the sig- 
nificance of this letter until after it had gone into the record. The pro- 
ponent of the charges immediately saw its great significance and 
eagerly welcomed its incorporation into the record. 

"November 22, 1900. 
"Hon. Joseph IV. Bailey, Washington, D. C: 

"My Dear Sir — I today paid Mr. H. C. Pierce $4,800 and asked him to send 
me in exchange therefor whatever drafts or receipts for money made by you he might 
have in his possession. My letter also stated my impression was that $4,800 was the 
extent of your obligation to him; but requested that he advise me if they were in 
excess of that amount. He made no reply to my letter other than to send me the 
enclosed, which I forward to you, the same being your receipt of April 25, 1900, for 
$3,300, which the voucher designates as a 'demand loan,' and your sight draft on 
him dated Gainesville, Texas, June 13, 1900, for $1,500 " * * * 

"As Congress will meet on Monday next, you will no doubt remain in Wash- 
ington until about the holidays. Keep me advised as to your movements. With best 
wishes I am Respectfully, 

"D. R. Francis." 

In connection with the above letter Mr. Francis said: "This 
letter was a perfect surprise to me when I read it yesterday. I had 
entirely forgotten paying Mr. Pierce the $3,300." The author be- 
lieves that the reason he forgot it was because the payment was in fact 
never made. Of course. Pierce may have given Bailey the $4,800 and 
told Bailey to give it to Francis for retransmission to Pierce either to 
satisfy Francis, who had been complaining about the matter, or else to 
lend color to the alleged repayment of the monev to Pierce by Bailey. 
This conclusion is strengthened by the fact that Francis' books, while 
showing other monetary dealing with Bailey, were absolutely blank 
on this $4800 item. Again the explanation above advanced is likewise 
confirmed by the fact that Pierce never returned this money to the 
Waters-Pierce Oil Company for all of Bailey's witnesses, the com- 
pany's employees, testified that the money was never repaid to the 
company but charged ofif first to bills receivable, then to legal expense 
and finally to profit and loss. The author is inclined to believe that 
Pierce and Bailey put up a job on Francis by which Francis was 
made to appear as a go-between in the alleged payment of this money 
but which in truth and in fact was only a make believe scheme to 
cover up the real facts. 

On page 689 and 692 will be found the following testimony by 
Francis. 



380 Senator J. W. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

Q. Governor, the $4,800 mentioned in the letter of November 
22, 1901, was that paid back, to you by Senator Bailey? 

A. Why, I can not tell anything about it from these books — I 
have looked all through here. 

Q. I mean 1900. 

A. I have looked all through these books and I can not tell. I 
can not tell you how that was paid back. 

When I introduced Mr. Bailey to Mr. Pierce, I felt I was con- 
ferring a favor on Mr. Bailey to as great extent as I was upon Mr. 
Pierce. 

You understand I was a very busy man and when I was writing 
Mr. Bailey, enclosing these due bills or notes, or whatever you may 
term them, that Pierce had sent me, it seems I only described two of 
them. That may have been all there was, but I described them and 
sent them on to him, and do you know, I have talked about that loan, I 
have talked about that loan that Pierce made to Bailey in 1900 twenty 
times in the last six months, and I never knew until yesterday that I had 
paid the loan off when I read this letter. I had no recollection of it. 

Q. Governor, had you ever had any talk with Mr. Bailey about 
the fact of this $3,300 loan appearing in the books of the Company? 

A. I don't remember to have ever had any talk with him, I may 
have had. 

Q. You said this morning you had some conversation? 

A. I did have a lot of conversation with him about charging 
Pierce, and told him he ought to charge Pierce, that is what I intro- 
duced him for, I didn't expect him to do all those things for noth- 
ing. 

Q. You didn't expect him to be a lawyer free of charge? 

A. Why, no — at the same time I was not introducing the man 
for influence. I was introducing a man at the bar for legal work, is 
what I understood, but Mr. Bailey when he told me — 

Q. Well, now your letters show there — excuse me — 

A. Let me explain — Bailey told me he considered it influence 
and he wouldn't charge Pierce for it, and I said to Pierce, "You are 
going to let Bailey do all that work for nothing?" and then Pierce 
told me of this loan, which I didn't like, I will admit. I didn't have 
any interest in it, except in Bailey, and I must have been delighted 
when I paid that loan off. I would have paid it if I had known he 
would have never paid it back. 

Q. Governor, you testified to your friendly interest in Mr. Bai- 
ley and your admitted interest as disclosed by your letters, that there 
was a disturbance down here about that — doesn't it follow that you 
were making a point to personally see that this transaction was 
cleared up, so far as the records went, in order to protect Mr. Bailey? 

A. I wanted to see it, yes, sir; I wanted to see it cleared up, 
mainly on Bailey's account. At the same time, I did not want to be 
mixed, I did not want to be responsible for Bailey's troubles in any 
way, I did not want to feel that I had involved him in them. 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 381 

LETTER FROM FRANCIS TO BAILEY. 

"St. Louis, Mo., May 15, 1901. 
"Hon. Joseph W. Bailey, If'ashington, D. C: 

"My Dear Sir: "V our note for $8,250, due four months after February 4th, 
matured May 8th, and I was compelled to take it up. Your letter enclosing renewal 
note for $5,000 and check for $3,250, did not reach me until a day or two after. 
I enclose statement showing that I paid two days interest, or $1.89, on the $8,250. 
This memorandum also shows that there was due you $179.17 on my books, and that 
the discount on the $5,000 amounted to $86.11, and stamps to $1. This leaves a 
balance to your credit on my books of $90.17. 

"I enclose your 90 day note of February 4th for $8,250, which is marked paid. 
The rate of interest charged on this note (five per cent) is unusually low, as money 
is now readily commanding six per cent on such paper. 

"Will you please write me on receipt hereof what is the condition of my Pecos 
county, Texas lands, which I deeded for your accommodation to Barney Gibbs and 
uhich he deeded back to me subject to an incumbrance of $8,000. \'ou told me that 
the endorsing of the $8,250 note relieved that land of any encumbrance? Are the 
records such as to show the land is now in my name free of encumbrance? 

"What are you doing in Washington? W^hy are you not in Beaumont, Texas 

or the neighborhood, making a fortune on oil" 1 don't know as it is important, 

but you want the whole letter 

Q. Read it all. 

A. "^'ou may know more about politics than I do, and may be more familiar 
with the situation, but >ou need some one to control your business affairs. 

"Please answer this letter at your earliest convenience stating in detail the con- 
dition of my Texas lands. Very respectfully, 

"D. R. Francis." 

LETTER FROM DAVID R. FRANCIS TO JOS. W. BAILEY. 

"August 2, 1901, St. Louis, Mo. 
"Hon. Joseph IV. Bailey. 

"My Dear Joe: I am in receipt of a letter from a party asking at what I will 
sell my lands in Clay county. You told me some time ago that you had sold this 
land, but you did not state at what price, except as you said, for enough to get me 
out whole. I made no reply to your statement other than to say, as I have often 
said before, that the land is not in condition for me to sell until I make arrange- 
ments " Now the balance of that, gentlemen, is something that don't pertain 

to this case at all. 

LETTER FROM DAVID R. FRANCIS TO J. W. BAILEY. 

"St. Louis, Mo., August 3, 1901. 
"Hon. Joseph fV. Bailey. 

"Dear Joe: I am in receipt of yours of tht 1st, and also telegram of this 
date. I have executed deed as requested and forward same today to C. E. Wellsley, 
Dallas. Enclosed you will find copy of my letter to him enclosing deed. 

"You are correct in surmising that I am overwhelmed with business. I did find 
time, however, to write you a few days ago, and expect an answer to that letter 
within a day or two. • * * 

"I am glad to hear you are getting in easy condition financially and sincerely 
hope you w ill remain so. Yours very truly, 

"D. R. Fran'CIS." 

Note the fact that by the year 1901 Bailey was "getting in easy 
condition financially." What a pity we have not his letters to 
Francis. It is possible they might have disclosed incidently some 



382 Senator J. W. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

of the sources of his newly found wealth. That was the year that 
he was forced to admit, when cornered on the stand, that he had re- 
ceived at least one fee of $2,500 direct from the Standard Oil Co. 

LETTER FROM DAVID R. FRANCIS TO J. W. BAILEY. 

"St. Louis, Mo., August loth, 1901. 
"My Dear Joe: I am in receipt of yours of the 8th, and have this day signed 
deed as requested, and forwarded same to C. E. Wellesley. I know these transactions 
are straight, but the trouble about it is that I am not likely to live always, and it 
may be they will get my heirs in trouble. You will observe the deed acknowledges 
receipt of $3,900. I desire you to understand that I have not received the $3,900, 
and I so write Wellesley. I can not tell you how busy I am. This letter has been 
interrupted four times in its composition and it may not be intelligible to you. I 
have not time to sign it but it will be signed by my stenographer. 

"Yours truly, 

"D. R. Francis." 

LETTER FROM DAVID R. FRANCIS TO J. W. BAILEY. 

"St. Louis, Mo., November 4th, 1901. 
"Dear Joe: I enclose herewith notice of the Merchants-Laclede National Bank 
of your indebtedness to said bank, being your three months note for $5,000, dated 
August 10, 1901. I have not time to write at greater length, as I can not tell you 
how busy I am. With kind regards, I am, very truly yours, 

"D. R. Francis." 

LETTER FROM FRANCIS TO BAILEY AT W^ASHINGTON, D. C. 

"St. Louis, Mo., November 9, 1901. 

"Dear Joe: I am in receipt of yours of the 5th, enclosing check for $5,000 to 
pay your note due at the Merchants-Laclede National Bank on November 13th. You 
had anticipated maturity, but it is better to do that than to wait until after it passes. 
* * * I am glad to have been able to accomodate you, and concluded that you 
must be in good condition as you were able to meet this obligation at its maturity. 
With best wishes, I am, very respectfully, 

"D. R. Francis." 

"P. S. — Since writing the above I have put check in bank for collection without 
discount." 

LETTER FROM DAVID R. FRANCIS TO JOSEPH W. BAILEY, AT WASHING- 
TON. 

"St. Louis, Mo., Dec. 17, 1901. 
"Dear Joe: Your draft for $1,528.73 on me was presented today, but I did 
not have the money to pay it; consequently told the bank to return it to Dallas, and 
have written Mr. Farris that if he will hold it up for eight or ten days I will be 
able to take it up. If I should pay this it would compel me to borrow, and my credit 
is already strained." — It is a good thing this is six years ago, I would object to this 
being put in — "I hope this does not inconvenience you; if so, let me know, and I will 
immediately wire Farris to return draft and it will be paid. I have not time to write 
at greater length. Yours truly, 

"D. R. Francis." 

From the above letter it would seem that Bailey did not hesitate to 
draw on Francis at will and without notice, for any amount he might 
want. Of course, some of these dealings may have been free from 
any special criticism but they disclose a line of association on Bailey's 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 383 

part, to put it most mildly, that put him under special obligation to 
such men as Francis, Pierce, Yoakum, Kirby and the railroad inter- 
ests, all of whom and whose interests were more or less, antagonistic 
and subject to the control of the United States Congress. 

TELEGRAM FROM FRANCIS TO BAILEY AT WASHINGTON. 

"St. Louis, Mo., Jan. 31, 1902. 
"Have just returned from Kentucky and seen yours 24th. Request complied with 
by this mail. D- R- Francis." 

LETTER FROM FRANCIS TO BAILEY AT WASHINGTON, D. C. 

"St. Louis, Mo., January 31, 1902. 
"Dear Joe: When your letter of January 13th was received 1 was in Wash- 
ington, and when yours of the 24th arrived I was in Kentucky. Enclosed you will 
find New York draft for $2,500, which you will observe has been ready for remit- 
tance to you since January 23rd. I very much trust that this delay has caused you 
no inconvenience. I have attempted to direct my men a number of times to inform 
people of my absence from the city when important letters are received, but it seems 
they will never learn the kind of letters to make replies to and the kind to ignore. 
I am busy as usual and have not time to write at greater length. This letter will be 
mailed in time to catch the train leaving at noon and should reach Washington by 
5:30 tomorrow evening. Yours very truly, 

"D. R. Francis." 

On page 688, Bailey Invest. Com. Report, 1907, Mr. Francis 
said: "You see my relations with Mr. Bailey were not kept in the 
same way my business house keeps accounts with its customers. This 
was a kind of a personal affair all the way through, it was my per- 
sonal books. I do not do a money lending business at all, I do a 
great deal of borrowing, but I do not do a money lending business." 

LETTER FROM FRANCIS TO BAILEY AT WASHINGTON, D. C. 

"St. Louis, Mo., May 3, 1902. 

"Dear Joe: Yours of the 30th ultimo enclosing draft on Dallas bank for 
$2,653.75 received, and same has been put in bank for collection. I observed instruc- 
tions to credit this on your note for $7,653.75 and let note run with same collateral 
attached, which the Merchants-Laclede National bank has consented to do. That 
note will not mature until May 7th. 

"I was sorry I could not see more of you in New York. I was in Washington 
only from 8 a. m. to 3 p. m. and went thence to Charleston, S. C, and returned 
to St. Louis on Sunday last. I hope this will find you in a flourishing condition, so 
far as happiness and politics afiEect you, as well as finances. I am rushed as usual 
but as soon as the exposition is over I think I shall take more rest. I observe that 
you have concluded to postpone the Fair for a year and I am sure now that we shall 
make it the greatest exposition ever known. With best wishes, yours truly, 

"D. R. Francis." 

It will be remembered that Mr. Bailey was the leader of the 
Democratic minority on the floor of the House at the time Francis 
first began to seek his influence and to silence his opposition to the 
World's Fair in which Francis was so deeply interested and in 
which many millions of dollars were involved. 



384 Senator J. IV. Bailey af Texas Unmasked 

TESTIMONY OF J . D. JOHNSON, ESQUIRE. 

Mr. Bailey having refused to take the stand, as he afterwards re- 
fused to be cross-examined not only by the proponent of the charges 
but by either of his attorneys, M. IVl. Crane or J. E. Cockrell, John 
D. Johnson, general attorney for the Waters-Pierce Oil Co., who 
voluntarily came to Austin to assist Mr. Bailey, was the first witness 
sworn and testified in substance (Bailey Investigation Committee's 
Report, pages 84-153), as follows: 

I reside in St. Louis, Mo. I am the attorney of the present Wa- 
ters-Pierce Oil Company, and have been since its organization in 
1900. I was the attorney of the former Waters-Pierce Oil Co., for a 
number of years prior and up to the time of its dissolution. There 
was never a day for ten to fifteen years past that there was not a Wa- 
ters-Pierce Oil Company. 

I was associated with Judge Clark of Waco. [The same Clark 
who has always favored the corporations as against the people and 
who fought the late lamented and patriotic Hogg.] He and I were 
looking after all of that litigation. Final judgment perpetuating an 
injunction against the old company from doing business in Texas was 
rendered by the United States Supreme Court in February, 1900. 
From February, 1900, until May 28th, 29th, or 30th, 1900, the old 
company was waiting for developments. [Hoping against hope 
that by some turn of political fortune it might avoid the judicial de- 
cree of ouster which had been fought to the last appeal. They were 
waiting for some political Trojan to pull the political wires and al- 
low them to continue to rob the people of Texas, as they had been 
robbing them for many years theretofore.] 

The matter was taken up with the Attorney-General about the 
first of May. We hoped or anticipated that we might secure an- 
other license for the old company, and, failing in that, we had a plan 
in view by which the parties interested with Mr. Pierce [the Stand- 
ard Oil crowd] should continue to transact the oil business of the 
State of Texas. 

JOHNSON RELATES STORY OF BAILEY'S SEDUCTION BY OIL MASTER. 

"For me, the gold of France did not seduce; 
Although 1 did admit it was a motive." 
I — Shakespeare; Henry V:. 

Let me tell you the story of that [first trip to Texas by Bailey, 
Johnson and Pierce, the last of April or first of May, 1900], as I re- 
call it. When the Supreme Court at Washington affirmed the judg- 
ment in the main case here, canceling the license of the old Waters- 
Pierce Oil Company, we be^an, Mr. Pierce and I he^an looking 
around considering. Mr. Pierce wanted to employ some addi- 
tional counsel who possessed personal and political influence. It is 
very natural for clients to look around for good lawyers of that char- 
acter. He had never met Senator Bailey, but was very favorably 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 385 

impressed ivit/i him. [Doubtless so impressed through their mutual 
friend, Governor Francis, who well knew, on account of the 
World's Fair and Gibbs Ranch Deal, that Senator Bailey was for 
sale — not in a coarse, open bribe-take and bribe-give fashion, per- 
haps, but nevertheless for sale.] In talking the matter over with 
Governor Francis one day, Mr. Pierce determined to come down 
here and surrender himself on that indictment at Waco, so that he 
could give personal attention to it, and see Mr. Bailey here and make 
arrangements to employ Mr. Bailey on behalf of the Waters-Pierce 
Oil Company. T/iat was the understanding. Francis had recom- 
mended Senator Bailey in April, 1900, to Mr. Pierce and ofYered to 
give Mr. Pierce a letter. [In the meantime, however, Francis had 
telegraphed Bailey to come to St. Louis. See Francis' testimony.] 

Mr. Pierce obtained that letter from Governor Francis, and it 
was one of the best letters of the kind I ever read — D. R.'s best com- 
position. [What irony and callous sarcasm.] That was to bring 
down here personally to Senator Bailey here, a letter of introduc- 
tion. Before we left St. Louis, Senator Bailey arrived at St. Louis, 
[he could not wait for he needed a loan, insolvent stranger that he 
was at the hands of the oily money master], as I understood on his 
way to Kentucky, and Governor Francis introduced Senator Bailey 
to Mr. Pierce. I was not present at the time, and I believe that Mr. 
Pierce and Governor Francis, induced Mr. Bailey to forego his trip 
to Kentucky and come down here to assist Mr. Pierce, and an engage- 
ment was made between Mr. Pierce and Senator Bailey for Senator 
Bailey to meet Mr. Pierce and myself at Austin. In pursuance of 
that agreement, Mr. Bailey, I think, left St. Louis before we did and 
went to Gainesville. We came to Austin and Senator Bailey met us. 
That is the first time I met Senator Bailey; that was after Mr. Pierce 
had met Mr. Bailey in St. Louis and requested Mr. Bailey to assist 
in adjusting matters with the authorities here. I think we went in a 
private car to Austin and Mr. Bailey was to meet us. 

Senator Bailey was not employed as a lawyer of the Waters- 
Pierce Oil Company in litigation in tiie Supreme Court of the United 
States previous to that time. Mr. Bailey was at Washington, but 
was not employed in that litigation, nor in any litigation that ever 
occurred afterwards in the courts. He did consult with me about 
the dissolution of the old corporation and its reorganization. I put 
the proposition up to Mr. Bailey as the ultimate recourse and Mr. 
Bailey approved of it. 

We were desirous in the first place to get a license to the old com- 
pany. We centered our efforts on that first. Mr. Bailey, I think, 
understood that. I discussed that question with Judge Clark and 
they both discussed that question with Attorney General Smith. 

The only effect or result of Senator Bailey's friendly acts to Mr. 
Pierce were to accord to Judge Clark and myself and Mr. Pierce, a 
courteous and considerate hearing at the hands of the Texas authori- 
ties. That is what we wanted. [How soit and insidious!] 



386 Senator J. W. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

His purpose was to aid Mr. Pierce in his efforts to get his com- 
pany and property out of a pretty bad situation. We were still up 
in the air. We had not decided what we would be able to do when 
we went to Waco [whether they would adopt bribery or other induce- 
ments to attain their ends], but we wanted a courteous and consider- 
ate hearing at Waco, in disposing of the litigation there. [And for 
this purpose they must needs employ, for his "personal and political 
influence," a then congressman and popular nominee to the United 
States Senate from Texas.] 

We wanted to get right of the litigation. I explained to Sen- 
ator Bailey the history of the Waters-Pierce Oil Company at the time 
we met him down here at Austin. I don't think he knew of it be- 
fore [then how ignorant Mr. Bailey must have been not to have 
known of a matter of great public notoriety that had occupied the 
attention of the courts and of the press, both of Texas and of the na- 
tion, for four years, and, as a result of which, Texas had won be- 
fore the courts but was about to lose through the perfidy and treach- 
ery of "personal and political" influence, then being exercised by her 
most popular public man — J. W. Bailey.] At the time Mr. Bailey 
met Mr. Pierce in St. Louis / don't think the question of the Waters- 
Pierce Oil Company being a trust came up there at all. I was not 
present when the money was borrowed. Mr. Pierce reported to me 
afterwards that he had made a loan to Mr. Bailey. My impression 
is that Mr. Pierce told me that Senator Bailey was going to Gaines- 
ville and would meet us at Austin. I think we came down by 
I.&G. N. 

I met Senator Bailey in the room adjoining room 14, on the par- 
lor floor of the Driskill Hotel in Austin, the first time. That may 
have been Senator Bailey's room that we were in. 

PIERCE AND HIS TRIAL AT WACO. 

We were anxious to get rid of that indictment without subject- 
ing the parties to the humiliation of a trial. Our interview with 
Mr. Bailey here in Austin was quite brief. At the interview with 
him we went over the case in a general way or situation. He left to go 
to see Attorney General Smith and he came back and reported the 
result of his conference. 

THE TRIO GO TO WACO. 

Mr. Bailey did not go with us to Waco but he met us there oy 
appointment. The purpose of getting Senator Bailey to go there 
with us, as I said, was to get his good offices in securing to Mr. Pierce, 
Judge Clark and myself proper consideration, yes, proper considera- 
tion at the hands of Henry & Stribling [It seems he did "quiet" 
Stribling's "restlessmess" but could not bribe Thomas.] IFe were 
getting ready, trying to dispose of all that litigation to get rid of it 
on the best terms possible. 

Henry & Stribling were friends of his. It was to assure us proper 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 387 

consideration or due consideration of Henry & Stribling. [Does 
this mean that Bailey's influence was invoked to make plain and easy 
the way, if necesssary, for a proposition of "a loan," in the nature of 
a bribe, to these lawyers, or either of them, who were representing 
the State?] 

CONFERENCE AT WACO, JUNE 1ST, 1900. 

STRIBLING BECOMES RESTLESS. 

After we failed in our efforts with Mr. Thomas, the then County 
Attorney, to settle that penalty suit, we filed a motion on behalf of 
Mr. Finlay, Intervenor, who, as president of the old company at the 
time of its dissolution, under the statute of Missouri, was the statutory 
trustee of that company. The motion was in the nature of a plea in 
abatement, based upon the ground that the old company was dis- 
solved. We tried it before Judge Scott who sustained it. 

I do not know what "policy" I referred to in my letter to Judge 
Clark. It may have been to keep Senator Bailey informed in re- 
gard to the proceedings in Texas. Mr. Bailey was not an attorney in 
the case. Senator Bailey, however, very kindly undertook to aid 
in the dismissal of that case or a settlement of it on a fair basis. [Mr. 
Bailey has since said that this kind of a suit ought not to be com- 
promised at all nor penalties collected, because he says, "If you fine 
them in the courts, they will fine the people in the markets." That 
is true, and yet Mr. Bailey was doing everything he could to get them 
off with the lightest expense possible and was trying to save his 
friend Pierce from the humiliation of a court trial on the indictment 
pending at Waco. Now he says that the trust masters should be wear- 
ing stripes. But what has he ever done and what is he doing now to 
help the people of Texas put stripes on H. Clay Pierce?] 

There was an indictment against all the managers in Texas, of the 
Waters-Pierce Oil Company, against Pierce individually, and 
against all of the then trustees of the Standard Oil Trust. Judge 
Scott instructed the jury to find for the defendants [Judge Scott, 
whether right or wrong, has always stood by this crowd of boodlers.] 

I have a vague recollection of having received a letter from Judge 
Clark in which he advised me that I had best have Mr. Bailey com- 
municate with Stribling — something of that kind. I have a recol- 
lection about his saying, "Stribling is very restless and dissatisfied at 
the outcome here [Waco, Texas, June ist, 1900], on last Friday, and 
threatened, privately, to have a Receiver appointed for the old coni- 
pany." I don't know whether or not that is his language but that is 
the substance of it. Stribling claimed that the property of the new 
company ivas the same as the old. 

We had had a conference in Waco about June ist, 1900, havmg 
left Austin the evening of the -^ist of May, after we had obtamed the 
license to the new company. The purpose of that conference was to 
see whether we could agree on a basis of disposing of the cnmmal 
cases, and of the penalty suit. The conference occurred m the af- 



388 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

ternoon at Messrs. Henry & Stribling's office. I made an offer on 
behalf of the old Waters-Pierce Oil Company to settle that case by 
pleading guilty and paying a penalty of ten thousand dollars, plus 
twenty-five hundred or three thousand dollars to the attorneys for the 
State. Messrs. Henry & Stribling, who were sub-counsel under 
contract with Mr. Thomas' predecessor, Mr. Taylor, seemed willing 
to dispose of the case that way. Mr. Thomas refused to accept the 
proposition. The conference failed. It was the outcome of that 
conference with which Stribling was dissatisfied and restless and 
about which Judge Clark wrote me. I assume that it was, because 
there was nothing else he could have been dissatisfied or restless 
about. 

CLARK-JOHNSON FAMOUS CORRESPONDENCE. 
(J. D. Johnson's testimony continued.) 

The letter dated St. Louis, Mo., June i6, 1900, addressed to Hon. 
George Clark, Waco, Texas, is signed by my stenographer. The 
letter dated St. Louis, Mo., August 2nd, 1900, addressed to Hon. 
George Clark, is signed by me. The letter dated St. Louis, Mo., 
November 12, 1900, addressed to Messrs. Clark & Bolinger, Waco, 
Texas, is signed by me. [These are the letters set out in full in the 
chapter entitled, "Standard Oil Exhibits" that disclose the conspir- 
acy between Clark, Johnson, Pierce, Bailey and Stribling, whereby 
the Waters-Pierce Oil Company was enabled to circumvent the law 
and remain in Texas and whereby Stribling was to betray his attor- 
neyship for the State of Texas.] 

I assume that I had replies from Judge Clark to these various let- 
ters. They are with my files in St. Louis. [Witness offered to get 
these letters for the Committee but later on in his testimony, after 
talking with Judge Clark, refused to do so. Evidently Clark was 
not willing to have his practices exposed.] 

I have been associated with Mr. Pierce since 1874, when I was 
representing him. I have authority, in connection with business in 
my department, to ask that money be paid out, and my request is 
generally complied with. The words, "S. D. drawn by Bailey for 
$1,500," I surmise mean "sight draft." I was led to O. K. that pay- 
ment by some statement made to me at the time. Whether it was 
Mr. Finlay or not I do not know. It was somebody in authority, I 
had nothing to do with it before it was put up to me. 

If that telegram was shown to me, that was sufficient. If Mr. 
Finlay, who was then vice-president, in the absence of Mr. Pierce, 
had asked me to O.K. it, and stated the facts, I would have O.K.'d it. 
Mr. Pierce was away at that time at Nebagamon, Wisconsin. 

Either the telegram, coupled with an explanation from Mr. Fin- 
lay, or an explanation from Mr. Finlay, caused my O.K. on this 
$1,500 voucher which authorized and directed the payment to 
Henry & Stribling, of Waco, Texas, the sum of $1,500 — "expense in 



The Political Life-Story of a fallen Idol 389 

anti-trust civil case of State of Texas vs. W. P. O. Co., at Waco." 
"Fee" in anti-trust civil case of State of Texas vs. W. P. O. Co., at 
Waco" — "fee" is stricken out and the word "expense" written in 
place of it. 1 have no recollection about the change. I may have 
stated to Mr. Finlay that there was no "fee" due to Henry & Strib- 
ling and they changed it on that account. That is surmise. Neither 
was there any "expense" due Henry & Stribling. I did employ Mr. 
Stribling in the Fall of 1900, to render legal services. [Is lobbying 
legal service?] 

The voucher is evidence that it was made to pay a sight draft 
drawn by somebody else — not by Henry & Stribling. [Of course it 
was made to pay Bailey's sight draft for $i,i;oo in keeping with 
Pierce's telegram to Finlay, and in keeping with the draft of June 
13th, 1900, which Bailey did, in fact, draw through the Gainesville 
bank and which was afterwards returned to him so that his signa- 
ture might be destroyed and which draft was so vehemently denied 
by Bailey as ever having existed, until its existence was accidently 
discovered by Governor Francis' letter book which showed that he 
returned Bailey's draft to him November 22nd. 1900, along with the 
$3,300 receipt, which Bailey had given to Pierce on their Hrst meet- 
ing, April 25, 1900, and both of which items were finally charged up 
to profit and loss and were never repaid to the Waters-Pierce Oil 
Company, according to their books.] 

The change from "fee," to "expense" in the $1,500 voucher 
might have been made at my suggestion, although there was no "fee" 
and no "expense" due them or either of them; none whatever. The 
words in my letter of June i6th, 1900, addressed to Judge Clark, "I 
have arranged to satisfy, at least for the time being, Henry & Strib- 
ling. This is strictly confidential," I am satisfied refer to this $1,500 
voucher. I don't see that it could refer to anything else. 

I feel satisfied if Mr. Stribling had obtained a loan of $1,500 
through Mr. Bailey, that I would not have paid Mr. Stribling a fee 
six months later without adjusting that matter, if I had known that 
the money had been the money of the Waters-Pierce Oil Company. 

The reason I referred, in my letter to Judge Clark, to the Henry 
& Stribling matter as strictly confidential, was I suppose, I did not 
want Judge Clark to communicate that statement to anybody, not 
even to Ills partner. There are some things that we lawyers have in 
our practice that we deem it inadvisable to go to others. [Espec- 
ially lawyers who are associated with county attorneys in prosecuting 
trusts, to insolvent United States Senators who practice political in- 
fluence for "loans."] 

STRIBLING AND THE FIFTEEN HUNDRED AGAIN. 

The letters of June 5th and June i^th from Judge Clark to me, 
just before the Henry & Stribling transaction, refer to the uproar 
that was being raised in the newspapers in Texas with reference to the 



390 Senator J. W. Bailey of Tcvas Unmasked 

re-admission of the Waters-Pierce Oil Company after its dissolu- 
tion and reorganization — that is the criticism as to General Smith. 
In my reply to Judge Clark's suggestion that "it would not be amiss 
to have Bailey make some suggestions to Stribling," I said, "I have 
arranged to satisfy, at least for the time being, Henry & Stribling. 
This is strictly confidential." I am satisfied that that allusion in my 
letter of the i6th refers to the transaction which is represented by the 
voucher for $1,500. 

Stribling was not in St. Louis at that time [June 16, 1900], and 
I had no communication with him, directly or indirectly. I sup- 
pose that Judge Clark thought, because Senator Bailey had taken the 
part he had in April, would be willing as a friend of Mr. Pierce, 
along the lines of his original action, to still further aid in disposing 
of these cases. We did not want Mr. Stribling to take the course he 
had threatened as a matter of course. IVe wanted peace; we wanted 
to end the litigation the cheapest and quickest way possible. [Peace, 
sweet peace, peace to pursue, noiselessly and peacefully, their pira- 
ical pursuit on the placid seas of Texas commercialsm at the cost 
of Texas' honor and Texas' commercial liberty! Verily they sought 
peace, not "in its usual channels and ordinary haunts," nevertheless, 
"peace in ways purely pacific."] If anybody [who?] saw fit to loan 
Mr. Stribling $1,500 to ease his financial condition so as to induce 
him not to take an unjustifiable course against the company, why I 
was perfectly satisfied. If the loan was made to Mr. Stribling in 
the way and for the purpose suggested, I do not know how the money 
got into Stribling's hands. 

I do not know why Judge Clark stated to me in his letter of June 
5th, that I "had better have Bailey communicate with Stribling." I 
suppose Judge Clark suggested that to me because I was leading 
counsel in the case and he would not feel at liberty himself in putting 
it up to Mr. Bailey. 

The reference in the letter of June i6th from me to Judge Clark 
that "I have arranged to satisfy, at least for the time being, Henry & 
Stribling," must have had reference to the transaction connected with 
the $1,500 voucher. It could not have had reference to anything 
else. 

STRIBLING GOES TO ST. LOUIS AND COLLECTS THIRTY-ONE HUNDRED 

DOLLARS. 

Yes, sir. Judge Clark wrote me that Stribling wanted to come 
up to St. Louis, but that he thought he had better not come. I 
would rather not answer that question with reference to the $3,100 
voucher. I do not think I should discuss my transactions with Mr. 
Stribling. It is going into private matters. It is not fair to Mr. 
Stribling and I do not feel at liberty to do so without his approval. 
[The Committee, strange to say, insisted, however, and the witness 
continued.] The reason I advised Judge Clark in my letters that 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 391 

Stribling had better not come up to St. Louis and that I could meet 
him somewhere else was because there had been a great deal said at 
the convention [Waco, August 8th, 1900, concerning the fraudulent 
re-admission, through Senator Bailey's influence, of the Waters- 
Pierce Oil Company], and 1 did not deem it advisable under the cir- 
cumstances, in view of Mr. Stribling's employment in that case, for 
him to come to St. Louis. That was my idea. It would — well it 
would look like it would give a man like Thomas [a patriot of sen- 
sitive honor] a reason to suspect and talk. 

In all probability my letter of November it;, 1900, to Judge 
Clark and the one from him to me, that he will probably be there [in 
St. Louis] Monday morning and that "we have gone very lightly 
over the matter with him and made the suggestions indicated by you, 
but without apparently convincing him," refers to Mr. Stribling. 
The confidential letter of November 12th, that I had received from 
Judge Clark, I think refers to Mr. Stribling. [Stribling was forced 
to admit on the stand that he collected $3,100 from the Waters-Pierce 
Oil Company, through Johnson, in November, right after the penalty 
suits were dismissed. He and Johnson claimed that this money was 
paid him for lobbying to be done for the Waters-Pierce Oil Com- 
pany before the Texas Legislature, when it met the following year.] 

1 assume that the $3,100 voucher was a settlement of the Stribling 
matter when he came to St. Louis in November. I went to Mr. 
Pierce and he gave me his individual check for $3,100. I do not 
think this had anything to do with fumigating the car. [Bailey once 
tried to explain this $3,100 payment to Stribling by explaining as he 
was informed, so he said, that it was for fumigating and refurnish- 
ing the private car on account of a case of small-pox.] There is an- 
other voucher which has not figured here at all, I think that it is some 
$2,200 or $2,300. 

BAILEY AND PIERCE INTIMATE. 

Yes, I know something about Mr. Bailey and Col. H. C. Pierce 
being intimate. I have met them together frequently, a number of 
times. I know Mr. Pierce has a very profound admiration for 
Mr. Bailey and I know Mr. Bailey has a very great respect for Mr. 
Pierce's ability along his lines. [His specialty being private loans 
to public men, political influence as collateral, with paper made out 
in any form to suit his customers.] They are both men of more than 
ordinary intellect, although of a different type of individuals. 

Mr. Pierce will not be here to testify in this investigation unless it 
is desirable for him to come. I understand that Mr. Pierce is under 
indictment. I will say this, however, Mr. Pierce assures me // Mr. 
Bailey wants him to come here he will do so and testify regardless of 
consequences. 

I wrote Mr. Bailey, when I saw matters were reaching a crisis 
here and there was liable to be an examination, telling him that I 
would be perfectly willing and I would be very glad to come here 

1—27 



392 Senator J. W. Bailey of Texas Unmarked 

and tell all I know about it. I came voluntarily without process, at 
his suggestion. 

I have met Mr. Bailey and Mr. Pierce at the Waldorf and I have 
met them at the offices of the Mexican Central Railroad Co., 25 
Broad Street. Mr. Pierce has apartments at the Waldorf; has had 
for a number of years. I have met Mr. Bailey there a number of 
times. After which Mr. Bailey took charge of the Tennessee Cen- 
tral matter. I met him at Mr. Pierce's offices with the Mexican 
Central Railroad Company, 25 Broad Street, and also at Mr. Pierce's 
apartments. 

Mr. Bailey has never appeared in any of the United States or 
State Courts for Mr. Pierce in any litigation — never. Neither has 
he ever filed any briefs for them in any court, nor prepared any 
pleadings, for them, to be filed in any court. 

The litigation of the Tennessee Construction Company has been 
conducted, under my supervision, with local counsel in Tennessee 
and local counsel in Indianapolis, Ind. Mr. Bailey has never as- 
sisted in any of that litigation, fit will thus be seen that Mr. Bailey 
has never appeared as a lawyer for any of these immense public util- 
ity properties, but has been used, as Johnson said that he and Pierce 
intended to use him, for "his personal and political influence."] 

PIERCE SEVERAL TIMES A MILLIONAIRE, 

Mr. Pierce was worth a good deal of money. He was several 
times a millionaire, I think at that time. He was connected prom- 
inently with one or more banks in the city of St. Louis as a stock 
holder and director. 

ATTORNEY JOHNSON TELLS OF THE STOCK JUGGLERY BETWEEN PIERCE 
AND STANDARD OIL. 

(pp. I4I-144-152.) 

From the time the license was obtained for the old Waters-Pierce 
Oil Company, in July, 1889, Mr. Pierce was in the absolute control, 
so far as the policy and conduct of the business was concerned, of that 
company, and continued to be in absolute control down to the time 
of its dissolution, notwithstanding an interest in the company was 
part of the time vested in the Standard Oil Trust, and afterwards in 
the Standard Oil Company of New Jersey. It is predicated upon 
the further fact that when General Smith decided that there was no 
way by which the judgment of ouster could be set aside and the old 
company would have to cease to do business in the State, and we con- 
cluded to dissolve the old company and organize a new company, I, 
on behalf of Mr. Pierce, made an arrangement with the general solic- 
itor of the Standard Oil Company of New Jersey, representing the 
Standard Oil interest, to the eflfect that Mr. Pierce should subscribe 
for all the shares of stock of the new company, and hold those shares 
and manage the company as an absolutely independent concern, with- 
out dictation or control upon the part of the Standard Oil interests. It 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 393 

was on the strength of that that Mr. Pierce made the representation 
to Mr. Bailey. 

While I believed that that arrangement of holding the stock, was 
not violative of the law, at the same time I recognized the fact that 
great prejudice existed against the Waters-Pierce Oil Company, and 
it was not policy for that matter to be made known to anybody. When 
I say that Mr. Pierce controlled the business of the Waters-Pierce 
Oil Company absolutely, I do not mean to say that there was an abso- 
lute freedom from controversy and friction as between him and the 
Standard interests, because there was such, and they were furnished 
with information as to details of the company's business, both before 
— of both during the existence of the old company and the new com- 
pany, but that was not an incident of or resulting from any control ex- 
ercised by them. It was done upon the theory that they, as stockhold- 
ers or representing stockholders, under the laws of Missouri, had a 
right to be informed from time to time, and inspect the books from 
time to time, if necessary, to know how the business was conducted. 

I will say this, too, that Mr. Pierce and I took advantage of the 
final decision of the Secretary of State to organize the new company 
in the manner in which I did, and to make the arrangement which I 
did to secure to Mr. Pierce the control of the company, because I felt 
that the company would never be free from the assaults upon it, 
whether the law justified those assaults or not, as long as, or if it were 
known, that as a matter of fact the company was controlled by the 
Standard Oil intetrests. [In connection with this sham or blind it is 
an interesting fact that the Waters-Pierce Oil Company continued 
to buy all of its supplies from the Standard Oil Trust and to make 
quarterly and semi-annual reports to 2b Broadway just the same as 
ever. Pierce was simply given back the presidency of the Waters- 
Pierce Oil Company May 29th, 1900, from which he had been ousted 
in February, 1900. He was so restored to the presidency because of 
his political influence in Texas through Francis and Bailey.] 

Mr. Pierce had subscribed and paid for all the shares of stock un- 
der the agreement that he was to hold them in his own name, for the 
purpose of managing and directing the affairs of the company and he 
held these shares until the following September [from April to Sept. 
1900], all of them, intact, so that at the time the representation was 
made, I suppose Mr. Pierce might have said that his representation 
to Mr. Bailey was true. [Just as true as a lie could be.] 

But there was another idea in the matter. I am going into heart 
secrets, close business secrets. That was the fact, [purpose] to keep 
the fact absolutely concealed, undisclosed, and to conduct the com- 
pany on a strictly legal basis. There is one matter, in response to Rep- 
resentative Cobb's question, I was just thinking about. Mr. Pierce's 
interest in the business of the Waters-Pierce Oil Company in Texas 
at that time was quite valuable. If there had been no organization and 
incorporation of the new Waters-Pierce Oil Company, and the old 
Waters-Pierce Oil Company had gone out of the State, iaevitably the 



394 Senator J. W. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

Standard Oil Company would have established itself in the State of 
Texas, exclusively, and Mr. Pierce would have lost that business and 
the interest in that business which was represented by the Waters- 
Pierce Oil Company — by the old company, before its dissolution and 
the new company after its organization. That had a great deal of in- 
fluence, I assume, in determining Mr. Pierce in the course he took. 

The Standard Oil Company of New Jersey joined in the applica- 
tion to dissolve the Waters-Pierce Oil Company. [In Missouri, May 
28th, 1900.] The Standard Oil Company of New Jersey as stock- 
holders voted for the dissolution of the corporation. It may have 
been through myself under power of attorney. 

Some time in September [1900] Mr. Pierce was requested to turn 
over relatively the same number of shares of stock in the new company 
which had been standing in his name on the books of the company, 
as those which stood in the name of the Standard Oil Company of 
New Jersey in the old company at its dissolution, to a gentleman by 
the name of Garth, an officer in a New York bank, possibly the Sea- 
board National Bank — I do not remember that, exactly. In com- 
pliance with that request he took the certificate for that number of 
shares to the bank and delivered it to Mr. Garth, and Mr. Garth paid 
him the subscription price for that number of shares, 277-100 I be- 
lieve it was. I forget the odd number of shares. Mr. Pierce received 
a check for the mo7iey, and delivered the certificate. That is all he 
knew of the transaction until some time in the summer of 1904, that 
certificate of stock was presented to the proper officers of the Waters- 
Pierce Oil Company for transfer on its books to one M. M. Van Bu- 
ren, and the transfer was made. [It is significant that the Standard 
Oil Company's interest in the Waters-Pierce Oil Company stock was 
turned over in September, 1900, while Bailey was still hobnobbing 
with "my dear Pierce," and that, too, to an employe of the bank with 
which S. G. Bayne was and is connected, to-wit: the Seaboard Na- 
tional Bank of New York. The dividends belonging to the Stan- 
dard Oil Company on this stock, after it was transferred to Mr. 
Garth, were paid by the Waters-Pierce Oil Company to the Standard 
Oil Company through this banker, Bayne. Bayne is the man, also, 
who employed Bailey for $5,000 to write a charter for the Security 
Oil Company of Texas, which is now being sued by the State of Texas 
as belonging to the Standard Oil Company. Bailey's connection with 
the organization of the Security Oil Company was simultaneous also 
with his vote on the Aldrich Currency Measure, which measure was 
opposed by all the Democratic Senators as being designed for the ben- 
efit of the money interests. Senator Aldrich has long been recognized 
as a senatorial tool of the Standard Oil Company. Senator Aldrich 
is not only the father-in-law of John D. Rockefeller's son, but is said 
to be "oil-rich." It is doubtful, however, whether or not he could 
outclass "Coal Oil Joe" in this particular.] 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 395 

ATTORNEY JOHNSON VERIFIES THE VOUCHERS AND DOCUMENTS. 

I know H. Clay Pierce intimately and am familiar with his hand- 
writing. That is Mr. Pierce's signature on the $3,300 voucher. That 
is Mr. Pierce's signature on this receipt for $1,500. The upper por- 
tion of the $1,500 voucher is in the handwriting of Mr. A. M. Finlay. 

The endorsement in lead pencil, "S. D. drawn by Bailey for 
$1,500," on the telegram looks something like Mr. Finlay's, but I 
could not say whether it is or not. [Finlay was vice-president of the 
Waters-Pierce Oil Company and afterwards also testified that the 
notation, "sight draft drawn by Bailey for $1,500," was in his hand- 
writing.] 

The voucher proper, dated June 1 5, 190-, that "O. K. j. D. John- 
son," is mine. Under the words, "Approved for payment," "A, M. 
Finlay. V. P." or "V. Pt.," I believe is Mr. A. M. Finlay's hand- 
writing. 

The signature on the voucher, dated St. Louis, November 20th, 
1900, for $3,100, is that of C. M. Adams and I think it is his true and 
genuine signature. At the bottom of the voucher is the signature of 
H. C. Pierce. 

I recognize J. P. Gruet's signature — "Approved for payment, J. 
P. Gruet, Secretary." I recognize after the word "Entered," the 
signature of Mr. E. H. Avery. I know his signature. 

At the bottom of the receipt on the $200 voucher, dated at St. 
Louis, is the signature of Mr. H. C. Pierce. "Approved for pay- 
ment," "J. P. Gruet, Secretary," that is the signature of J. P. Gruet. 

The signature to the letter dated June 10, 1901, purporting to be 
addressed to Mr. J. P. Gruet, is that, I think, of Mr. H. C. Pierce. 
The voucher dated June 12th, and "J. W. Bailey, Gainesville, 
Texas," which follows, I would say is in the handwriting of J. P. 
Gruet, Sr. The signature "A. J. Hutchinson," and the initials, "J. P. 
G. Jr.," I do not know. "Approved for payment," "J. P. Gruet, Sec- 
retary," — that is Gruet's signature — Gruet senior, I mean. 

J. P. Gruet was secretary of the Waters-Pierce Oil Company at 
that time. That is my recollection. 

Mr. Pierce has a secretary who has been with him a number of 
years, by the name of Stewart, who signs his name pretty near like 
Mr. Pierce's own signature. On closer inspection I am inclined to 
believe that the letter dated June loth, 1901, signed "H. C. Pierce, 
president," and the letters "J. S." after the word "president" is that 
of his secretary. 

THE SECRET CODE BOOK. 

The little book stamped on the back, "W. P." containing 355 
pages with "W. P. Co. No. 601, rules for use of this code," is the pri- 
vate cipher code book of the Waters-Pierce Oil Company. [This is 
the famous secret code in which Mr. Bailey figures as Senator "Re- 
publish," whose business it became, under Pierce's employment, and 
instruction, to "quiet all Texas parties." His task remains unfinished 



396 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

and grows more impossible from day to day as the people come to 
discover the character of their formerly idolized Senator.] 

BAILEY AT 26 BROADWAY, NEW YORK, N. Y. 
(pp. 122-13I.) 

The witness, Johnson: 

I heard a conversation between Senator Bailey and Mr. Pierce 
with reference to the relations between the Waters-Pierce Oil Com- 
pany and the Standard Oil Company, or the relations as afifecting Mr. 
Pierce's interest in the Waters-Pierce Oil Company. This conversa- 
tion took place at Mr. Pierce's offices in the headquarters of the Mexi- 
can Central Railway Company, 21; Broad Street, in New York city, 
1905. 

Mr. Priest and myself went on to New York for the purpose of 
conferring with Mr. Pierce about the subject matter of the conversa- 
tion. Mr. Bailey came in and was present during the conversation, 
and he took part in it merely incidentally. He was not interested in 
the matter except as the personal friend of Mr, Pierce, as I under- 
stood. 

It was in the board of directors' room of the Mexican Central 
Railway Company, Broad Street Exchange, the room adjoining Mr. 
Pierce's private office. It was either in the summer or early fall of 
1905. I went to New York quite a number of times that year. 

Mr. Bailey came into the room I think from Mr. Pierce's room, 
and I think Mr. Pierce was with him. It was mentioned that Mr. 
Pierce had advised Mr. Bailey, either that day or very shortly before 
that time, of the fact that he had deceived [?] Mr. Bailey, ox con- 
cealed from him the fact that the Standard Oil Company owned 
shares of stock of the Waters-Pierce Oil Company. 

Mr. Bailey said that he was very much shocked and surprised at 
that information. [How ridiculous! Every cross roads merchant in 
Texas had known the fact to a moral certainty for fifteen or twenty 
years. How credulous and innocent was "our confiding Joe."] 

Mr. Pierce said that he was very sorry that the fact had been kept 
from Mr. Bailey. [It was a pity!] I made some remark myself that 
I regretted it exceedingly, and that I felt all along that Mr. Bailey 
should have been apprised of the fact. [Bailey after he admits he 
found it out, in 1905 said nothing about it, so what difference 
would it have made from the beginning?] Mr. Bailey said, "I have 
about made up my mind to have nothing more to do with Mr. Pierce" 
— that was half serious, more serious than humorous. [ ?] He seemed 
annoyed, but he said, "If Mr. Pierce is going to have a fight with the 
Standard Oil Company or the Standard Oil people, I will stand by 
him and do all I can to aid him." 

Certain matters in regard to the purpose of that conference were 
mentioned. The fact was also mentioned that the Standard Oil people 
at that time denied that the Standard Oil Company owned a block 
of the stock which it was supposed was held by them, and had claimed 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 397 

that the stock had belonged to Mr. Van Buren, in whose name it then 
stood on the books of the company. It was suggested by Mr. Priest 
that he had an engagement to meet Mr M. F. Elliott, the general 
solicitor of the Standard Oil Company, that morning about that hour, 
and suggested that Mr. Bailey acompany him to twenty-six Broad- 
way. [This lawyer, Elliott, is the general attorney of the Standard 
Oil Company from whom Bailey was forced to admit later on in the 
proceeding that he, Bailey, had collected a fee of $2,i;oo paid by the 
Standard Oil Company to Bailey for a legal opinion rendered the 
Standard Oil Company in 1901, the next year after he began his graft- 
ing with Pierce.] It is only about a square, two squares away from 
the Broad Street Exchange. Mr. Bailey finally consented to do so, 
as I understood him, on the theory that he wanted to find out the facts 
or what their position in regard to the matter was. They left the con- 
ference, and left Mr. Pierce and Mr. Richards and myself there. 
[Richards was another lawyer, Pierce's son-in-law.] 

That ended that conference. Mr. Bailey returned afterwards — 
it may have been in an hour or more, and we then had further conver- 
sation about the same subject. When Mr. Bailey returned from the 
meeting with Mr. M. F. Elliott, general solicitotr of the Standard Oil 
Company, he was considerably excited, and proceeded to recite what 
had occurred. [It is not to be supposed, however, that Bailey's ex- 
citement came about from having seen the Standard Oil Octopus or 
from having been given a glimpse at their money bags at 26 Broad- 
way.] 

When they got over there, he said, they were ushered into a room 
where there was John D. Archbold present, and several other Stan- 
dard Oil people. [Think of it, TexansI Your great Senator, self- 
styled "the greatest living Democrat," mixing with that bunch of oil 
barons, right in the heart of their rendezvous — in the inner offices of 
the greatest trust the world has ever known!] He said to Archbold, 
who was spokesman, that he, Bailey, had been deceived in regard to 
their owning stock in the Waters-Pierce Oil Company. [Why then 
had he taken Standard Oil money direct in 1901?] that he was very 
much surprised in regard to it, and he wanted to know the facts of it. 
[Pierce had told him it was so and he, Bailey, told the Investigation 
Committee of the Texas Legislature in 1901 that Pierce "was an hon- 
orable man — a life-long Democrat."] Archbold said, "It is a mis- 
take. The block of stock which stands in Mr. Van Buren's name be- 
longs to Mr. Van Buren and we have no interest in it, and I hope. 
Senator Bailey, you will believe my statement." Senator Bailey said 
that he replied, "Mr. Archbold, I don't believe a damm word of it." 
[Who would have thought that "our Joe" would become so indignant 
on such an occasion!] 

There was further conversation between the two. Mr. Bailey 
finally got up and as he left the room told them, "All of you ought 
to be in the penitentiary, and I will do what I can to put you there," 
and that terminated the interview. [Why should they have been in 



398 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

the penitentiary any more than Pierce? They had received 60 per 
cent of the extortionate gains from the people of Texas and Pierce in- 
dividually had plundered the people of Texas for 40 per cent of those 
extortions.] 

Mr. Bailey did not tell us what steps he took to accomplish his 
purpose to put them in the penitentiary nor anything about what he 
was going to do with reference to putting them in the penitentiary. 
[In this connection it is interesting to note that Bailey met the Attor- 
ney General of Texas, R. V. Davidson, in Washington in the sum- 
mer of 1906, a year after this fiasco at 26 Broadway, and knew At- 
torney General Davidson was seeking proof of the connection be- 
tween the Waters-Pierce Oil Company and the Standard Oil Com- 
pany, but never a word did he tell Davidson of the facts just described 
by the witness Johnson. If Bailey had been honest in his pretense of 
ignorance as to the connection between the two companies why did 
he not immediately write the attorney general of Texas of the fact in 
1905? Instead of that, even in 1906 in talking to Attorney General 
Davidson in Washington, he told the latter that he, Bailey, would be 
glad to join Davidson in his effort to oust the Waters-Pierce Oil Com- 
pany as a part of the Standard Oil Company, provided Davidson was 
sure that the suit would be successful — otherwise he, Bailey, would 
have nothing to do with it. Again, Bailey must have known of the 
holdings and operations of the Standard Oil Company in Texas in 
1901, for he, himself, was forced to admit on the stand that he had re- 
ceived a $2,500 fee for an opinion rendered the Standard Oil Com- 
pany with reference to doin^ business in Texas at that time. Verily 
"there are none so blind as those who refuse to see."] 

finlay's "memory." 

Andrew M. Finlay, a brother-in-law of H. C. Pierce, and vice- 
president of the Waters-Pierce Oil Company for many years, ap- 
peared as witness for the Standard Oil Senator from Texas (Senator 
Republish) and testified (Bailey Invest. Com. Report, 1907, pp. 
739-760) in substance as follows: 

My name is Andrew M. Finlay. I live in the city of St. Louis; 
am engaged in the oil business; have been associated with the Waters- 
Pierce Oil Company since 1878. I know H. C. Pierce and he is a 
brother-in-law of mine. 

PIERCE LOSES PRESIDENCY OF WATERS-PIERCE OIL COMPANY BUT GAINS 
IT BACK THROUGH BAILEY. 

The witness, Finlay (continuing 739) — In 1900 I was vice-presi- 
dent; after that I was president for a while, and then vice-president 
again and have been continuously with the exception of a few months 
that I was away from St. Louis. 

Yes, sir; I am acquainted with Senator J. W. Bailey of Texas. I 
got acquainted with him, I think in the summer of 1900. I do not 
recall anything about the day of the month. 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 399 

I was made president on the 14th day of February, 1900. Mr. 
Pierce had been president. 
Q. Why the change? 
A. The reorganization. 
Q. Why the reorganization? 

Mr. Hanger — Do we understand this had anything to do with the 
inquiry, Mr. Chairman? 

The Chairman — Is this the reorganization — 
Q. The reorganization of the Waters-Pierce Oil Company in 
the winter of 1900. 

The Chairman — I can't see any materiality, Mr. Cocke, but go 
ahead. 

Q. Why the change of officers on February 14, 1900? 
A. Legal matters that I could not tell you about. Mr. Johnson 
handled the legal matters for the company. 

Senator Green — Mr. Finlay, you will have to talk a little louder. 
A. Legal matters that I couldn't tell you about. Mr. Johnson 
handled the legal matters of the company. 

Q. You were vice-president before February 14, 1900; for how 
long? 

A. From February — 

Q. But before that had you been vice-president — you were made 
president February 14th? 

A. You refer to before 1900, previous to 1900? 
Q. Previous to February 14, 1900, how long had you been vice- 
president? 

A. I couldn't tell you without going to the records, seven or 
eight years, maybe more. 

Q. Then on account of legal complications on February 14, 
1900, you were made president? 

A. The reorganization of the company. 
Q. Who was made vice-president? 
A. J. P. Gruet, I believe. 

Q. Did Mr. Pierce hold any office upon the reorganization of 
February 14, 1900? 

A. I don't think so at that time. 

Q. Had he dropped out of the directory as well as any official 
position? 
A. No. 

Q. He remained in the directory, did he? 
A. I don't remember that, I couldn't say. I can not tell you with- 
out going back to the records, I couldn't tell you. 
Q. How long did you continue president? 

A. I answered that before. I think from February to May 29th 
or the first part of June. 

Q. Who became president^ 
A. Mr. Pierce. 
Q. Why? 



400 Senator J. W. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

A. I don't know. 

Q. Don't you know as a matter of fact, Mr. Finlay, that Mr. 
Pierce was made president at that time at the dictation or with the 
consent of the Standard Oil interests? 

A. I don't know anything about it. 

Q. And for the reason of his supposed political influence in 
Texas? 

A. I don't know anything about that. 

Q. Mr. Finlay, are you willing to say under oath, that as presi- 
dent of the company, with the company since 1878, that you have no 
knowledge of the reason that entered into those matters at that time? 

A. They were legal complications that were handled by At- 
torney Johnson. 

Q, Is he the only man that does know? 

A. Mr. Pierce would know. 

Q. While you were president, were you such in fact, or only in 
name? 

A. I was managing the business? 

Q. As president? 

A. Attending to the marketing of goods more particularly. 

Q. Were those — 

A. A general oversight of the business in that direction. 

Q. Were those functions usually pertinent to the president of the 
company? 

A. A general oversight of the business. 

Q. What office did you hold after May 29, 1900? 

A. Vice-president. 

Q. You dropped back into your old place? 

A. Yes, sir; I was elected vice-president. 

Q. What sort of a reorganization did you have on February 14? 

A. What sort of a reorganization? 

Q. Yes, sir. 

A. Our annual meeting was held at that time. 

Q. By reorganization did you mean, Mr. Finlay, simply the 
shifting in the officers? 

A. I don't understand the details of the legal complications; 
never did. 

Q. Had the company then been ousted from Texas by the affirm- 
ation of the judgment rendered in the State of Texas by the Supreme 
Court of the United States? 

A. There had been trouble down here, but the details of it, I 
could not tell. 

Q. Where was Mr. Pierce between February 14, 1900, and May 
29, 1900? 

A. I don't recall where he was in February or in March, but I 
know he was in St. Louis sometime in April or May. 

Q. What was he doing? 
A. That I don't know. 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 401 

Q. How much of the stock of the company did Mr. Pierce and 
yourself control February 14, 1900? 

A. Aren't you asking me questions that don't pertain to the case? 

Q. We hear no objection from counsel or committee; we think 
it has a bearing; we would like to know what you know about this 
case, Mr. Finlay? 

A. Will you ask the question again, Mr. Cocke? 

Mr. Cocke— Will you kindly read it, Mr. Stenographer? 
(Stenographer reads the question.) 

A. I do not recall the exact number of shares, 2,700 and odd. 

Q. Of the total amount? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Which was how much? 

A. 4000, 4000. 

Q. How many of the 4000 w^as owned by the Standard Oil Com- 
pany of New York at that time, or held in trust for its benefit in some 
other name? 

A. I don't know the exact number, the difiference between — there 
were a few shares held by others, I don't remember who they were. 

Q. Yes, sir? 

A. Previous to 1900, are you asking? 

Q. No; I am asking on February 14, 1900. 

A. Well, whatever the difiference was between what Mr. Pierce 
held and a few shares held by the directors, that was held by some one 
else. 

Q. Then with you and Mr. Pierce controlling 2,700 out of 4,000 
shares, Mr. Pierce was retired from presidency? 

A. Did I say 27 for Mr. Pierce? 

Q. That is the way I understood you ; I may not have understood 
you correctly, Mr. Finlay. 

A. I am getting things mixed. There was 13, 1,250, 1,240 odd 
shares; I got the question — 

Q. Then the Standard Oil Company— you just got the numbers 
reversed, have you not, sir? 

A. I reversed the numbers. 

Q. Who voted the Standard Oil stock at the meeting of Feb- 
ruary 14, 1900? 

A. I do not recall. 

Q. Upon the reorganization of May 29, 1900, the second reor- 
ganization, after the so-called dissolution, in whose name were the 
2,700 and odd shares belonging to the Standard Oil Company carried? 

A. When do you ask; what date? 

Q. Yes, sir — no, I asked you in whose name were they carried? 

A. They were in Mr. Pierce's name, so far as I know. 

Q. Uh-huh. The whole business, were they not, for a few 
months? 

A. So far as I know; I never saw it. I never had anythmg to do 
with the certificate book. 



402 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

Q. Who had the certificate book? 

A One of the other officers. 

Q, Which one? 

A. I don't know whether it was Gruet or Adams. 

Q. How long did that continue in his name, do you know? 

A. No, sir; I couldn't — 

Q. Isn't it a fact that that only continued in his name until the 
September following? 

A. I don't know. 

FINLAY MEETS BAILEY IN PIERCE'S PRIVATE OFFICE JUNE, 190O. 

Q. Well, you spoke, Mr. Finlay, of having seen Mr. Bailey 
twice during the year 1906, is that right? 

A. I said I thought it wasn't more than twice. I think he was 
passing through St. Louis, as I recollect, and Mr. Pierce's office was 
next to mine. The office boy came in and said there was a Mr. Bailey 
wanted to see Mr. Pierce. As I recollect, I stepped into the room and 
told Mr. Bailey Mr. Pierce was out of town. 

Q. Into whose room? 

A. Mr. Pierce's room. 

Q. Mr. Bailey was in Mr. Pierce's room? 

A. He called on Mr. Pierce. 

Q. And was standing there in the room? 

A. Or was sitting. He only stayed a minute or two when he 
found he wasn't in town. I remember calling him Mr. Bailey. 

Q. Yes, sir. 

A. I didn't know he was Senator until later when he called, I 
think the second time, and — 

Q. At the time, who was with him at that time, Mr. Finlay? 

A. I don't recall that anybody was with him. He was passing 
through, my recollection is he said he was passing through the city 
and wanted to see Mr. Pierce. It made no impression. 

Q. Can you give the date, kindly, Mr. Finlay? 

A. The date? 

Q. Yes, sir. 

A. I could not; no, sir. 

Q. Can you approximate the date? 

A. It was in the summer season, 19 — 

Q. Or spring? 

A. Not spring. In the summer season, because Mr. Pierce 
wasn't there. Therefore it must have been the summer season. 

Q. Was it before or after your so-called dissolution and reorgan- 
ization? 

A. It was after May 29th, 1900. It was after that date, I am 
positive, because it was in the summer months when Mr. Pierce 
wasn't there. 

Q. During what months was he absent from the city that season ; 
name them, as near as you can. 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 



403 



A. I can't say positive, but I presume he would go from his fish- 
ing camp to his summer home. That would take him away from home 
very near all summer. He was very seldom in St. Louis during the 
summer months. 

Q. Do you remember how long, about how long it was after you 
had gotten your new permit, in days or weeks, that you saw Mr. Bailey 
in Mr. Pierce's office? 

A. I can't recall that; it was during the summer of 1900. 
Q. Well, was it five or six days after you had gotten your per- 
mit, or two weeks, or — 

A. I can't recall that; it must have been a month or more, be- 
cause Mr. Pierce wasn't there the latter part of June, July and Au- 
gust. 

Q. Well, he wasn't there June loth, was he, Mr. Finlay? 
A. I could not say. He was there the first part of June. 
Q. Do you recognize that telegram as one having been received 
by you from Mr. Pierce? 

A. I have no recollection of the telegram whatever. 
Q. From the telegram itself — what do you say on that point? 
A. I have no recollection of it. It is a matter that would attract 
very little attention. I would pass it through in the regular course as 
many another one that passed over my desk. 

Q. Will you say, as a matter of fact, that you did or did not re- 
ceive that message, remembering that you are upon oath? 

A. I evidently received it or I would not have written "sight 
draft drawn by J. W. Bailey for $1,500." 
Q. Is that notation dated, Mr. Finlay? 
A. No, sir. 

Q. What is the date of the telegram? 
A. June 1 2th. 

Q. And what was the hour you received it, if you did receive it, 
according to that telegram? 

A. It is dated 1 1 :o5 in the morning. 

Q. Then, inasmuch as you made the notation on it and conclud- 
ing that you did receive it, doesn't it follow that Mr. Pierce was not 
in St. Louis on June 12, 1900? 

A. I should certainly say he was not, if the telegram is dated 
June 1 2th. 

Q. Now is that about the time you met Senator Bailey in his 
office? 

A. I have no recollection whatever of meeting Senator Bailey in 
connection with the telegram. 

Q. Well, that is not the question. 

A. I beg your pardon if I didn't understand you correctly. I 
will try and answer you correctly. 

Q. Was that about the time, disassociating it for the mornent if 
you like, from the telegram, that you saw Mr. Bailey in Mr. Pierce's 
office? 



404 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

A. I couldn't say. 

Q. Can you state when it was when Mr. Pierce left for his fish- 
ing trip? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Was it before or after the so-called reorganization? 

A. It was after. 

Q. He was a party to that transaction, was he, in the reorganiza- 
tion? He was present at the time those negotiations were on? 

A. Yes, sir; he and Mr. Johnson handled the whole matter. 

Q. Handled the whole matter? 

A. I judge so. I wasn't in the conference with them on it at all. 

Q. You were not called into consultation? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. With reference to such matters? 

A. No, sir; a legal proposition. 

Q. Can you state whether or not Mr. Pierce left St. Louis the 
next, in the next two or three days, following the issuance of the per- 
mit? 

A. I could not. 

Q. Do you know whether he came to Texas about that time? 

A. He came to Texas previous to the reorganization. 

Q. Did he not make two trips to Texas that season? 

A. I am not clear as to that. 

Q. Then there is no way by which you could fix it with any de- 
gree of definiteness other than it was during the summer months, and 
during Mr. Pierce's absence that you saw Mr, Bailey in his office? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. What did you say, Mr. Finlay, to Mr, Bailey? 

A. I could not have said anything to him, because he asked for 
Mr. Pierce, and Mr. Pierce wasn't there. I had no conversation with 
him at all. 

Q. Did you send him word by the office boy? 

A. No, I stepped into Mr. Pierce's room. The office boy came 
into my room. 

Q. What did you tell him? 

A. Tell Mr. Bailey? 

Q. Yes, sir. 

A. He asked me if Mr. Pierce was in town, and I said no. 

Q. Is that the first time you ever met him? 

A. That is the first time I ever met Mr. Bailey. 

Q. Did he introduce himself to you? 

A. The office boy told me Mr. Bailey was in the room. 

Q. Did you introduce yourself to him? 

A. Certainly. 

Q. As vice-president of the company? 

A. No, sir; that my name was Finlay. 

Q. You did not tell him whether you were bookkeeper or what 
position you held with the company? 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 405 

A. His calling had nothing to do with the business of the com- 
pany, he called to ask for Mr. Pierce. 

Q. Do you know what he wanted with Mr. Pierce? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. What did he say? 

A. My recollection is he simply asked for Mr. Pierce. I told 
him Mr. Pierce was not in town. 

Q. Then what did he say? 

A. I think he left. He might have said something about the 
weather. 

Q. He was alone? 

A. He was alone, so far as I remember. 

FINLAY MEETS BAILEY IN PIERCE'S PRIVATE OFFICE AGAIN IN IQChD. 

Q. Well, you say you met him twice that year, that is the first 
time — you are sure you did not meet him in April before that? 

A. No, sir; I did not. 

Q, Well, when did you meet him the second time, Mr. Finlay? 

A. In the summer. 

Q. Well, later in the summer? 

A. It was in the fall. The first time I met him in the early sum- 
mer. 

Q. The early summer, the first meeting? 

A. Well, it may have been in June. 

[Congress adjourned that year June 7th. Bailey evidently came 
through St. Louis, failing to find Pierce, he doubtless called on John- 
son between June 8th and 12th, likely loth or nth. Johnson had re- 
ceived Clark's letter of June 15th saying: "The press of Texas have 
begun to take up the issue of the permit by the Secretary of State, 
Hardy, in a vigorous manner. * * * The weekly press will 
doubtless take up the cry and there is a great deal of dissatisfaction 
evident throughout the State. What it may lead to we can not say, 
but the condemnation of Hardy and Smith is almost universal. In 
this connection you had best have Mr. Bailey communicate with 
Stribling. He is very restless and dissatisfied at the outcome here on 
last Friday (June ist) and threatens, privately to us, to institute pro- 
ceedings, and have a receiver appointed for the defunct company. 
* * * It would not be amiss to have Bailey make some suggestions 
to him." It was just at this junction, "early in June," as Finlay says, 
that Finlay found Bailey in Pierce's office. Then followed, doubt- 
less, some communication to Pierce by Johnson or Finlay or Bailey 
and as a result of which Pierce wired Finlay on the 12th of June to 
"Have Bailey loan Stribling $i,?oo on his note," and that "Bailey 
should quiet all Texas parties."] 

Mr. Finlay (continuing)— And then in the fall or late summer, 
I saw him again in Mr. Pierce's office. I could not tell you the date; 
that is seven years ago. 

Q. Under what circumstances at that time, Mr. Fmlay? 



406 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

A. He called, I simply saw he was in Mr. Pierce's room. I think 
the second time he was in Mr. Pierce's room when I went in there, 
and Mr. Pierce addressed him as Senator Bailey, and that is the first 
time that I— 

Q. He wasn't Senator then, was he? 

A. Whatever the date ; maybe later still, but the second time Mr. 
Pierce spoke of him as Senator Baiiey. 

Q. Yes, sir. Well, what conversations did you have there at 
that time? 

A. Nothing whatever. 

Q. How did you come to speak to him at all? 

A. When I went into this room? 

Q. Yes, sir. 

A. Mr. Pierce introduced him, as I remember, not knowing that 
I had seen him before. 

Q. Did you leave any memorandum on Mr. Pierce's desk about 
Mr. Bailey having called the first time? 

A. He was out of the city. 

Q. I know, but didn't you tell him when he came back that Mr. 
Bailey had been there? 

A. I don't recall that; I don't recall whether I did or not. Those 
are details it would be hard to remember. 

Q. Well, those were strenuous times with your company, so far 
as its Texas business was concerned, were they not, Mr. Finlay? 

A. We were doing business right along after the reorganization. 
I was attending to the management of the business, particularly the 
marketing and traffic department. 

Q. How did your company get back into Texas? 

A. I don't know, sir. I told you they were legal matters Mr. 
Johnson handled and I can not tell. 

Mr. Cocke — Mr. Chairman, this is a question I have no doubt will 
be objected to, so I state it to the Chair before I put it, and that is to 
the general understanding among the officials of the company at the 
time, as to how and by what force or influence the company was able 
to escape its troubles and continue to do business in Texas. I know — 

The Chairman — Do you want to ask that question, Mr. Cocke? 

Mr. Cocke — Yes, sir. 

The Chairman — Well, you had better ask the question before you 
argue it. 

Q. All right. What was the understanding among the officials 
of the company and the higher employes, such as Mr. Gruet and your- 
self, if you might be termed such, as to the power or influence by 
which your troubles in Texas were overcome and you were permitted 
to continue to do business here? 

A. I know nothing about the details. I know that Mr. Pierce 
came to Texas — you say he came twice — I don't remember of his be- 
ing down here but once. 

Q. Do you know who came with him? 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 407 

A. I do not, except J. D. Johnson, I think. 

Q. Do you know whether he met Mr. Bailey at that time? 

A. I have heard so. 

Q. Well, did you know at the time — 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Do you know, did you know it at the time you saw Mr. 
Bailey? 

A I can not recall that. 

O- Did you know that he had been instrumental in getting your 
company straightened out down here? 

A. No, I didn't know that. 

Q. You didn't know he was employed by the company, did you? 

A. No; not the legal part of it. 

Q. What interest personally have you in that company? 

A. Personally? 

Q. Yes, sir; what financial interest? 

A. A salary and own one share of stock. 

Q. You have no other financial interest in the company and had 
none at that time? 

A. Never had a dollar. 

Q. Well, do you know how long Mr. Bailey stayed in Mr. 
Pierce's office, the second time you saw him there? 

A. My recollection is — no, I don't the second time. My recollec- 
tion is I went into the office and saw him there, was introduced to him, 
and came out. My office was right next to Mr. Pierce's, just a door 
between, and I had a way of going into his oflice without being an- 
nounced, simply opening the door, and if I saw any one in there, I 
would back out. 

Q. And you found Mr. Bailey in there on this occasion? 

A. The second time. 

Q. Was he alone with Mr. Pierce? 

A. So far as I remember, nobody was with him. 

Q. Was Mr. Francis there? 

A. No, sir; I never saw Mr. Francis and Mr. Bailey together. 

Q. Did you ever see Mr. Francis and Mr. Pierce together? 

A. No, sir; unless up at the St. Louis Club, of which I am a 
member. 

Q. You didn't hear any conversation between Mr. Bailey and 
Mr. Pierce then on that occasion? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. And don't know how long he stayed? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Nor the occasion of his business there? 

A. Not a thing about it. 



408 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

FINLAY VERIFIES FAMOUS PIERCE-BAILEY-STRIBLING TELEGRAM AND 

VOUCHER. 

Mr. Finlay (continuing, p. 748) — 

Mr. Johnson asked me to come to Texas [to testify for Bailey]. I 
expect to turn in my expense account to the Waters-Pierce Oil Com- 
pany. 

The notation on the left hand side at the bottom of the telegram, 
"Sight draft drawn by Bailey for $1,500," is my handwriting. There 
was evidently a sight draft drawn by Bailey on Pierce. I have no 
recollection of seeing the draft, but there must have been a sight draft. 
The cashier may have advised me it would come through — the nota- 
tion would indicate to me that there was a draft drawn by Mr. Bailey 
on Mr. Pierce. It would come through the cashier in the office. 

I don't know what impression Mr. Pierce's telegram to me to have 
Senator Bailey loan Mr. Stribling money, made on my mind. I pos- 
sibly phoned and asked Mr. Johnson if it was O. K. Certainly I saw 
this voucher [$1,500 Bailey-Stribling voucher] from that memoran- 
dum I made at the time. I don't recall whether Stribling was one of 
our attorneys or not in the civil cases at Waco. They had something 
to do with the Waco cases. Fees for legal services would be passed on 
by J. D. Johnson. I would pay no attention except to pass it along 
and do as Mr. Pierce told me. 

Q. Did you receive any letter from Mr. Pierce after the 1 2th and 
before this voucher was made out on the 15th? 

A. I had my stenographer look through the files for any corre- 
spondence relative to the matter, and she could find nothing. [What 
a pity! He would not have brought it along to Texas if he had found 
it. Just like old man J. D. Johnson could not find anything in his files 
bearing on this matter.] 

Q. When you were in Waco, [in November, 1900] did you learn 
that Mr. Stribling was representing the opposition to the company, 
the Waters-Pierce Oil Company? 

A. They, I knew, were connected in some way with the cases, but 
I didn't know, I don't remember what it was. * * * 

I knew Mr. Stribling was not representing our Company. [And 
yet he received company money.] 

Q. You say this word "Stribling" in the telegram gave the sug- 
gestion to you? 

A. That was, there was a firm there, a legal firm of Stribling & 
Taylor. 

Q. Stribling, or whatever it was; didn't you know the firm in 
which Stribling was a member, by reason of your previous visits to 
Waco? Didn't you know Stribling was in opposition to your com- 
pany in that litigation? 

A. I may have known it at that time. 

Q. You don't even remember now which side of the case Strib- 
ling was on? 



I 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallot Idol 409 

A. They were not on our side. If that man was in the case, they 
were on the other side. 

Q. This voucher on its face indicates that the Waters-Pierce Oil 
Company were indebted to Henry & Stribling for services, namely, a 
fee of $1,500, don't it? 

A. That looks as though the voucher had been made out. 

Q. Well, 1 say it is what it indicates. 

A. Account of expense. 

Q. Well, it means that the Waters-Pierce Oil Company are in- 
debted to Henry & Stribling in the sum of $1,500 for services, don't it? 

A. It looks that way. 

Q. Mr. Finlay, was this transaction or this telegram a usual or 
unusual one in the ordinary course of business of the Waters-Pierce 
Oil Company? 

A. I should say it was an unusual one, but I have — 

Q. Unusual? 

A. No recollection of the telegram. If it wasn't for the writing 
there, I would say I have never seen it before. [He would have for- 
gotten it, of course, except for the fact that we could prove his hand- 
writing on the telegram.] 

Q. Well, now then, you were asked about, if that voucher could 
have been made in the shape it was made, if a personal draft had been 
drawn by Senator Bailey on Pierce, if such a draft had been drawn 
indicating that it was to pay Henry & Stribling a fee of $1,500 in 
those cases for the Waters-Pierce Oil Company, that is just the way 
the draft, the voucher, would have been made, isn't it? 

A. Yes, sir. 

The following questions were asked by Mr. Cobbs: 

Q. I want to ask you some questions. 

Mr. Wolfe — Well, hurry up and get through. 

The endorsement on the $1,500 voucher of June 15, 1900, "ap- 
proved for payment, A. M. Finlay," is my signature. Under the words 
"approved for payment" I signed "A. M. Finlay." 

The writing on the voucher "draft delivered to Mr. H. C. Pierce 
by Mr. Gruet, November 17, 1900," signed by "H. N." may be 
Naudin. 

In my opinion the receipt that purports to be signed by H. C. 
Pierce dated St. Louis, Mo., June 15, 1900, is the genuine signature 
of Mr. H. C. Pierce. 

"a/c Stribling & Taylor," scratched out; also, "Henry & Stribling, 
fees Waco civil cases," is in my handwriting. 

Mr. Johnson came with me from St. Louis on this trip; no one 
else. Mr. Johnson told me I would be called on to testify as to the 
$1,500 voucher, that's all; told me that coming down on the train. 



410 Senator J. W. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

J. P. GRUET, SR., GIVES INSIDE OF THE STORY. 
(Pages 201-281.) 

J. P. Gruet, Sr., witness for the complainant, being first duly 
sworn, testified in substance: 

I live in Webster Grove, Missouri, a so-called suburb of St. Louis, 
where I have resided for about fifteen years, having come to St. Louis, 
first as an auditor and subsquently secretary; then vice-president for a 
brief period, and then again secretary of the Waters-Pierce Oil Com- 
pany. My services began September 15th, 1890. 

H. C. Pierce was president of the Waters-Pierce Oil Company. I 
reorganized the business after I came there. I was with the Standard 
Oil Company from 1886 to 1887. The Standard Oil Trust agreement 
was made in 1882. The various Standard Oil Companies around the 
country and in foreign countries were managed by local men at vari- 
ous headquarters. The officers of the headquarters received reports 
from the field. They in turn made statements and reports and trans- 
mitted them to some person at 26 Broadway, in New York, who rep- 
resented that particular interest, which interest was represented at 26 
Broadway for the purpose of correspondence and facilitating of the 
business. The management of the detail of the business was largely 
with local men at headquarters, of course. The details of policy were 
discussed in a committee called the "Domestic Trade Committee," at 
26 Broadway. 

I have been in the committee as the representative of the Waters- 
Pierce Oil Company. I have sat in their committee and heard their 
deliberations as a representative of the Waters-Pierce Oil Company. 
When I spoke of the Standard Oil Company and "each interest," I 
mean the Standard Oil Company with its various Standard Oil Com- 
panies. I will name some of them: The Standard Oil Company of 
Baltimore, the Standard Oil Company of Cincinnati, the Standard 
Oil Company of Louisville, the Standard Oil Company of Indiana 
and Iowa, the Continental Oil Company of Denver, the Continental 
Oil Company of San Francisco. Those are Standard Oil companies, 
and they had representatives at 26 Broadway, with whom they corre- 
sponded for the facilitating of the business. 

Yes, there is a Standard Oil Company of New Jersey. Up to re- 
cently it was a distributing concern like all the others. The Waters- 
Pierce Oil Company was similar to all the other distributing compa- 
nies; received all its petroleum supplies from the Standard Oil Com- 
pany. 

They all bought their supplies of petroleum products from the 
Standard Oil Company. In a few cases, for instance, in the scarcity of 
gasoline in recent years, they have bought some gasoline from the Gulf 
Refinery Company, but their supplies were received on requisition 
from the Standard Oil Company, mostly from Indiana, until the 
plants were built in Texas — the first plant at Corsicana, and then sub- 
sequently they took supplies mostly from the Security Oil Company. 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 411 

[The Security Oil Company, it will be remembered, was helped into 
existence by J. W. Bailey for a fee of $5,000.] 

The Security Oil Company was organized within three or four 
years, perhaps five, after oil was discovered at Beaumont. The Wa- 
ters-Pierce Oil Company got refined oil and gasoline from the Secu- 
rity Oil Company. I cannot say the Security Oil Company was a Stan- 
dard Oil organization except from hearsay. 

I can describe how we did business with 26 Broadway and that 
was custom. We reported all our sales in detail to 26 Broadway. By 
detail I mean tank wagon sales. [At this point Judge Wolfe of Sher- 
man, a Bailey partisan and member of the suppression committee, 
could not stand to hear about these details and strenuously objected 
but finally the witness was allowed to proceed.] 

In detail I mean by reporting tank wagon sales of refined oil and 
gasoline to show the delivery made in the way of products, and also 
any other — the other deliveries such as in barrels or cases. We made 
reports of all construction. We made reports of salaries. We made 
reports in detail of all the business that was transacted every month, 
quarterly and every six months and yearly. 

Certainly the Standard Oil Company assumed to exercise super- 
vision over the business of the Waters-Pierce Oil Company — always 
at regular intervals, at least once a year, there would be auditors come 
to us from 26 Broadway's auditing department to audit all of our 
books and accounts for a period, taking up from the time of the last 
audit to the period when they were there. That system was in force 
all the time when I was there — never changed. 

SIMULATED REORGANIZATION. 

Yes, I know of the purported reorganization in May, 1900. There 
was no change in our reports to the Standard Oil Company by reason 
of that reorganization or in the visitorial powers of 26 Broadway, ex- 
cept in this, perhaps, that during this time they designated a man in 
Mr. Tilford's ofiice at 26 Broadway as commercial agent for the Wa- 
ters-Pierce Oil Company — R. H. McNall— and in lieu of sending 
letters and reports to Mr. Tilford we sent them to him. In all other 
ways the business was the same as it ever had been. 

We received instructions from Mr. Commercial Agent, along 
after the business had been run that way for a year or two, that per- 
haps it would be better to address communications to 75 New Street 
to him. That was the New Street entrance to 26 Broadway, The 
building ran from Broadway to New Street. 

Mr. Tilford had, up to the time of Mr. McNall's appointment, 
been our correspondent at 26 Broadway — that is the representative of 
the Waters-Pierce Oil Company, This man McNall was clerk for 
Mr. Tilford in his office. He had his desk in his ofiice and continued 
right on in the same way. That was the only change there was. No 
change in the business of the office — none whatever. We did not 
change any of the forms or methods of doing business, either before or 



412 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

after. We continued right in the same way. [That was Senator 
"Coal Oil Joe's" way of "Bowing to the law" and signified the process 
by which "this great trading corporation," as he called it, was brought 
back into Texas "with clean hands" and laid, gently laid, by him, the 
idol of Texas Democracy, "at the feet of the Attorney General of 
Texas."] 

PIERCE DEPOSED AND THEN REINSTATED AS PRESIDENT OF W.-P. OIL CO. 
BY STANDARD OIL. 

Mr. Pierce was made chairman of the board, I think, on February 
14th, 1900. [This was right at the time that the United States Su- 
preme Court had affirmed the decision of the Texas court ousting the 
Company from Texas and the presidency of the Company was taken 
from H. C. Pierce, but restored to him on May 29th, 1901, after the 
mock reorganization and re-entry into Texas through Francis' and 
Bailey's "personal and political influence."] Mr. Finlay was made 
president and I was made vice-president and Mr. Adams secretary 
and treasurer. That continued until the reorganization of May 28th, 
1901, when Mr. Pierce was elected to the presidency, Mr. Finlay vice- 
president, and I was promoted to secretary — elected secretary of the 
new company, one and the same. 

WHY PIERCE WAS REINSTATED AS PRESIDENT OF THE WATERS-PIERCE 
OIL COMPANY. 

From the general understanding in the office at the time, I know 
why Mr. Pierce retired from the presidency of the Waters-Pierce Oil 
Company in February and then returned to the presidency in May. 
The general understanding was that Mr. Pierce retired from the pres- 
idency on account of pressure broug/it to bear upon liim by 26 Broad- 
way people. He got back through the supposed influence — [Here the 
witness was about to testify, as he had previously told the proponent 
of the charges and his attorneys, that I\Ir. Pierce was reinstated be- 
cause of his "pull with Mr. Bailey and Bailey's political influence in 
Texas," but the witness was not allowed to proceed with this phase of 
his testimony — See pages 273-274, Committee report.] 

Mr. Pierce has frequently talked to me about the connection of 
Senator Bailey with these matters. I always understood, from his 
talk to me, that these matters were used in connection with the Texas 
cases. My relationship with Mr. Pierce was that intimate that I did 
not have to go into detail about everything that he asked me to do. / 
would not presume to. [At this point, pages 276-277, the witness was 
about to state in substance what Mr. Pierce had told him with refer- 
ence to Senator Bailey's connection with the readmission of the Wa- 
ters-Pierce Oil Company into Texas, but Senator Stone and Senator 
Looney, members of the Senate Suppression Committee, did not seem 
to want to know the facts and both interposed strenuous objections, es- 
pecially Senator Looney. Bailey says that Attorney General David- 
son is "a fool;" then the question arises is Senator Looney, Bailey's 
candidate for Attorney-General, really a looney?] 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 413 

The way I recollect the new charter and the method of its procure- 
ment was this : One day Mr. Pierce informed me that he had sent his 
son-in-law up to Jeflferson City to surrender our charter and re-incor- 
porate the company; that was on the 28th, [May, 1900], and on the 
29th he returned with a new charter, the same name, the same capital, 
the same in the directorate, except for the name of H. M. Tilford, now 
appeared the name of J. D. Johnson. [Wonder why they did not sub- 
stitute McNall, Tilford's office boy, for the latter's place?] The five 
directors were the ones who signed the incorporation papers. That 
is all the change that I know anything about. 

We still continued to correspond with Tilford at the commence- 
ment of this. I cannot tell exactly at what time McNall was appointed 
commercial agent, and the correspondence went that way but the cor- 
respondence either went to Tilford or McNall just the same for some 
time. 

I was secretary of the company until I left in 1905, after which I 
had a business arrangement with Mr. Pierce for about eight months. 
I was nominally to run the Pierce Investment Trust Company in St. 
Louis but did no business. 

PIERCE, BAILEY AND STANDARD OIL. 

That friction between Pierce and Standard Oil Company 
throughout the years and in which fight Bailey joined Pierce in 
1905 on account of the fact that Pierce wanted to charge prices 
that even the Standard Oil Company regarded as exorbitant and con- 
sequently a ruinous policy, may be a surprise to some people in Texas 
but such is a fact. In other words. Pierce and Bailey have been and 
now are engaged in a controversy with the Standard Oil people be- 
ginning in 1905 wherein and whereby they proposed to maintain 
prices on oil at a figure so high as to meet the disapproval of the Stan- 
dard Oil Company itself. Not, of course, that Standard Oil Com- 
pany is not willing to make a large profit but because they regard 
Pierce's policy as ultimately ruinous. Gruet in personal conversa- 
tion with the proponent of the charges and his attorneys told them 
that such was the fact, giving them much of the details. The follow- 
ing sworn testimony, by Mr. Gruet (Bailey Investigation Committee 
Report of 1907, page 273) is to the same effect: "There was contin- 
ually a controversy between Mr. Pierce and the Standard Oil people, 

Q. On what account? 

A. Particularly the prices. 

Q. Well what about the prices? 

A. Because they were too high, they thought. 

Q. Who thought so? 

A. The Standard Oil people. 

Q. And who insisted upon keeping them up? 

A. Mr. Pierce. 

For the last five or six years Mr. Pierce has given very little time 
to the Waters-Pierce Oil Company's affairs. He u-as absolute in cer- 



414 Senator J. W. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

tain lines, as to selling prices. He did not bother with matter of de- 
tail, in any manner, shape or form." 

GRUET DELIVERS EVIDENCE AGAINST THE WATERS-PIERCE AND STAN- 
DARD OIL COMPANY TO ATTORNEY-GENERAL DAVIDSON, THROUGH 
ASSISTANT ATTORNEY-GENERAL LIGHTFOOT. 

(J. P. Gruet, Sr., testimony, Committee Report, 1907, page 217- 
220.) 

I never saw Mr. Lightfoot until sometime last August, middle of 
August. I delivered the photographic papers to him on his second 
visit to St. Louis sometime in September; I think the Attorney Gen- 
eral got possession of the original documents a long time afterwards. 
It was the time I came down here in November, I think about No- 
vember 1 8th. Up to that time they had not seen the originals. I 
should say that I showed Lightfoot those papers the first time coming 
down on the train from St. Louis. I gave them to Mr. Lightfoot for 
the basis of a suit against the Waters-Pierce Oil Company to show the 
connection, simply and solely, and the control of the Waters-Pierce 
Oil Company by the Standard Oil Company. 

I will name some of the Standard Oil Companies that compose the 
Standard Oil Company: "The Standard Oil Company of Balti- 
more, the Standard Oil Company of Cincinnati, the Standard Oil 
Company of Iowa and Indiana, the Continental Oil Company of 
Denver, the Standard Oil Company of San Francisco, those are the 
Standard Oil Companies, and they had representatives at 26 Broad- 
way, with whom they corresponded for the facilitating of the business. 

Yes, sir, the Waters-Pierce arrangement was similar to all the 
other distributing companies, receiving all of its petroleum supplies 
from the Standard Oil Company. 

There was never any claim made, to my knowledge, that there was 
any allotment made as a distinct act, but by implication and observ- 
ance the Waters-Pierce Oil Company operated in the State of Mis- 
souri south of the Frisco, and along the P'risco to within a few miles of 
Kansas City, all the southern part of Missouri, all the State of Ar- 
kansas, Oklahoma, and Indian Territory, the State of Texas, and the 
west half of Louisiana, west of the river. 

Just let me say right here, the one share of stock that I held of the 
Waters-Pierce Oil Company at that time was one share of stock that 
was transferred to me from the holdings of the Standard Oil Company 
to qualify me as a director. It wasn't mine ; never was mine. 

The officers of the company, the Waters-Pierce Oil Company, 
were two of them Standard Oil men. The Standard Oil Trust never 
dictated any policy to anybody. The policy was dictated by Mr. Til- 
ford, who received his instructions from the Standard Oil Trust. 
[This is like Mr. Bailey saying that he never received any money 
from the Waters-Pierce Oil "Company. Never did any one else ever 
receive any money from a corporation as such. It is not only soulless 
but bodyless and acts only through its officers employes and agents. 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 415 

Mr. Bailey never received any money therefore from the Waters- 
Pierce Oil Company but did receive it from the president of the 
Waters-Pierce Oil Company just as the Standard Oil Company never 
dictated a policy to the Waters-Pierce Oil Company except through 
Mr. Tilford who in turn received his instructions from higher officers 
of the Standard Oil Company.] 

The stockholders of the Waters-Pierce Oil Company are: Stan- 
dard Oil Company, New Jersey; H. C. Pierce, Andrew M. Finlay, 
C. M. Adams, H. M. Tilford and J. P. Gruet; or were at the time I 
gave my deposition, January 8th, 1897. This stock was issued to the 
Standard Oil Company May 20th, 1892. I do not know from whom 
the Standard Oil Company, New Jersey, obtained their stock. The 
old certificates were in the name of the Standard Oil Trust. 

HOW THE VOUCHERS REACHED MR. GRUET. 

I kept these vouchers, with the advice and consent of Mr. H. C. 
Pierce, on account of not making them public documents around the 
offices, in a file in my office, a steel file in my office which was locked 
up at all times, for the purpose of not having them in the general 
voucher case, which was in the Clerk's room and open to everybody. 
When I left the Waters-Pierce Oil Company they were taken away 
in a bundle with my private papers. I had not been in the office of 
the Waters-Pierce Oil Company more than a month before I re- 
signed. From the middle of January until the first of March I had 
not been there. These were taken to my house and I found them 
among my papers because they were in this private file of mine where 
I had personal matters. 

Mr. Pierce never said why he did not want them exposed to 
everybody, but he said that confidential matters ought to be kept 
under my charge, away from other people; we never talked about it 
any further than that. That just simply was his direction, and all 
of it. I understood why he did not want them exposed and I did not 
go into it any deeper. 

GRUET DEFENDS HIMSELF AGAINST BAILEY'S ATTACKS IN TEXAS BY 
GIVING COPIES OF VOUCHERS TO CHICAGO EXAMINER. 

I turned over the papers to him simply and solely on account of 
the attitude that Senator Bailey had taken about me. Senator Bailey 
was drawn into this affair entirely without any doings of mine. In 
the examination of Mr. Pierce in a private suit that I had against Mr. 
Pierce he introduced Mr. Bailey's name into that suit as connected 
with me in that matter of the Tennessee Central Railroad Company, 
and from that this has grown. I refer to the attitude of Senator 
Bailey that commenced last October [1906] in his speeches that he 
has made here, around through the Sate here. 

I first met Senator Bailey several years ago. I met him in Mr. 
Pierce's office. 

I had absolutely no other reason in submitting to an interview 



416 Senator J. W. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

with the Chicago Examiner except his attitude in the campaign 
here toward me. I saw it in the papers once in a while. I would 
buy a Dallas News and Houston Post once in a while and read his 
speeches. 

My purpose in keeping the papers was self defense against Mr. 
Pierce or anybody else who took it upon themselves to interfere with 
me in any way; self defense entirely and solely. I expected a great 
deal of talk one way or another, which has materialized to a large ex- 
tent. 

PIERCE INTRODUCES BAILEY TO THE STANDARD OIL AUTHORITIES AT 26 
BROADWAY THE LATTER PART OF 1 899 OR 19OO. 

I made the statement to Mr. Evans, the reporter, that Mr. Pierce 
told me along in the latter part of 1899 or 1900 — that is exactly what 
I told him — that along in the latter part of 1899 or the fore part of 
1900, Mr. Pierce told me that he had taken Mr. Bailey over to 26 
Broadway and introduced him to those people, and he was to look 
out for the IFaters-Pierce Oil Company's interests. Mr. Pierce told 
me that he had taken him over, and as I told this reporter, that he took 
him over to 26 Broadway and introduced him to the authorities over 
there the latter part of 1899 or the fore part of 1900. Mr. Pierce told 
me that immediately after the transaction. My recollection is it 
was just before the reorganization. 

Mr. Pierce did not tell me he was deceiving Senator Bailey, 
neither did he tell me that Senator Bailey believed that these transac- 
tions between him and Pierce were personal transactions, and had 
nothing to do with the Waters-Pierce Oil Company, nothing like that. 
/ assume Mr. Bailey thought that was the way he was doing it. 

It is true that no sooner would Pierce give Bailey money than he 
would order me to reimburse him; in other words, I would charge 
the sums which Bailey got to some particular account and credit 
Mr. Pierce with the amount. 

BAILEY'S SO-CALLED LOANS NEVER PAID. 

I was in charge of the accounting department and participated in 
the other business at the time these loans were made to Mr. Bailey. 

These loans were all charged to profit and loss; all of them. 

Legal expense would be charged ofif over to profit and loss. Bills 
receivable, if they were not paid, were charged to profit and loss. 
Neither the $3,300 note or the $8,000 note nor the $1,750 were ever 
paid during my time. [The witness continued with the Company 
for about five years after the transactions.] They never were re- 
ceived by the Waters-Pierce Oil Company; all these amounts were 
charged ofif to profit and loss. I know it because I worked up the 
finales of all the profit and loss accounts and I went over the trial 
balances and designated what things would be charged to profit and 
loss, so as to eliminate such things as had no value from the assets 
and got it down to the correct showing. 






The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 417 

These facts will be disclosed by the general ledger and the journal 
voucher book will have the closing entries, that is what we call the 
closing entries, which are transferred. 

We kept a set of private books at that time. We carried upon the 
general ledger an account against the private ledger. Profit and loss 
accounts were charged to the private journal and posted in the pri- 
vate ledger. Now, the general ledger and private ledger and the 
journal voucher book would show all these transactions covering 
these years. 

I do not know whether David R. Francis had any connection with 
any of these settlements of these claims. My whole knowledge of 
that is what Mr. Pierce has told me and my entries were made accord- 
ingly. 

J. P. GRUET IDENTIFIES AND VERIFIES ALL VOUCHERS AND DOCUMENTS, 
(pp. 201-280.) 

I recognize the voucher described "to amount loaned to Joseph 
W. Bailey. See Mr. Pierce's personal voucher, of April 25th, 1900. 
Account of Texas cases." This voucher is in the handwriting of my 
son, J. P. Gruet, Jr. "On account of Texas cases" is in my hand- 
writing and was placed there at the time it was made because Mr. 
Pierce told me that. My relations, at that time, were perfectly 
friendly with the Waters-Pierce Oil Company and with Mr. Pierce 
very friendly indeed. I had no animosity against Mr. Bailey and 
no purpose or intention of putting anything into that voucher except 
what Mr. Pierce ordered and directed. 

"Fees in Waco civil cases" Henry & Stribling voucher is in the 
handwriting of Andrew M. Finlay. The last of it is in the hand- 
writing of A. J. Hutchinson. The receipt for $1,500 attached to the 
voucher is in my handwriting but signed by Mr. Pierce. The face 
of it indicates that it was the amount of money which he had given 
Mr. Bailey "account of Texas cases." All of this was written on the 
strength of a telegram from H. C. Pierce to Andrew Finlay which 
telegram was as follows: "Andrew M. Finlay, St. Louis. If John- 
son approves, authorize Bailey to loan Stribling on his note fifteen 
hundred. Bailey should quiet all Texas parties. Tell him I will 
see him soon." Signed, "H. C. Pierce." Finlay got that telegram 
and sent it down to me to make a voucher with this notation on it, 
"sight draft drawn by Bailey for $1,500." 

In Mr. Pierce's letter to me of March 4th he enclosed me J. W. 
Bailey's note for the sum of $8,000 dated March i, 1901. He asked 
me to "take this note into bills receivable and deposit Company's 
check for like amount to my credit with the Fourth National Bank 
as I have given Mr. Bailey my check." The note is dated at Wash- 
ington, D. C, March ist, 1901. It has been audited by C. W. Nor- 
man, a Standard Oil auditor. All these matters were exhibited to 
them [Standard Oil auditors]; they report to Wade Hampton. He 
was in charge of the Standard Accounting in New York. 



418 Senator J. W. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

Mr. Pierce was in Wisconsin at the time Finlay received the tele- 
gram. 

I mailed the $1,750 draft, New York exchange, to Mr. Bailey. I 
do not remember whether there was a letter written. 

The $8,000 note was charged off to profit and loss in the regular 
course of business because it had outrun itself and was not paid. I 
charged it ofif and the $3,300 was charged ofif to profit and loss that 
current year. The $1,750 item was charged off in that year [1901] 
and the $8,000 note, as I recollect it, was charged ofif to profit and loss 
December 31st, 1903. 

This voucher of June 15th, 1900, for $1,500 and the notation 
thereon of November 17th, 1900, draft delivered to Mr. Pierce, in- 
dicates that this draft was in the hands of A. M, Finlay, vice-presi- 
dent, at the time this voucher was made. This memorandum here 
indicates that on November 17th, for some reason or other [Francis, 
Pierce and Bailey wanted to get Bailey's signature back to him] and 
some request from Mr. Pierce, it [the draft] was detached from this 
voucher and handed to Mr. Pierce by me. It indicates that the draft 
being delivered, that I requested a receipt from Mr. Pierce to cover 
the omission of the draft. For the reason that the voucher is stamped 
"with draft attached." It lacks the draft, therefore I had Mr. Pierce 
sign a receipt for $1,500, to give a receipt for the money. That is 
Mr. Pierce's genuine signature on the receipt. If that receipt had 
not been there the auditor would not have audited that voucher and 
would have demanded some original paper or some receipt for the 
money. 

This notation on the telegram indicates that "sight draft was 
drawn by Bailey," and the voucher indicates that the draft was in 
Mr. Finlay's possession on the 15th of June. I am not testifying to 
where the draft is. I don't know. [It was sent to Bailey by Francis 
on November 22nd, 1900, and by Bailey likely destroyed as he after- 
wards tried to make it appear that this draft had never been drawn.] 

The $8,000 note was charged to profit and loss, as I said to the 
best of my recollection, December 31st, at the closing of the entries 
of 1903, and I so advised Mr. Pierce. The reason it was not charged 
ofif when it was due in 1901 was because it was carried in in the sus- 
pense account, a system of carrying the assets after they become nine 
months old. 

If any interest had been paid on these notes it would have been 
credited on the Waters-Pierce Oil Company's books to interest ac- 
count or to profit and loss. [Senator Looney: "I am going to make 
a motion to strike from this record the answers of the witness to hear- 
say questions." J. D. Johnson, being Bailey's witness, was allowed to 
testify quite freely as to what Pierce told him, especially if it was 
favorable to Bailey. Now Looney and his bunch of Suppressers did 
not propose to allow Gruet to testify to what Pierce told him; neither 
would they allow the sub-committee to meet Pierce in St. Louis, 
which Pierce agreed to do on February 15th, 1907, nor to go to New 
York to examine Pierce or the balance of the Standard Oil crowd.] 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 419 

Pierce never called on me for the $8,000 note, never. 

The Standard Oil auditors visited our place on an average about 
once a year and they were supposed to go over all our vouchers, all 
our cash payments, receipts, cash books, and make a general audit of 
the business, as to our sales books, entries in the ledger and trial bal- 
ances. 

STANDARD OIL EXHIBIT. 

"26 Broadway, Room 800, New York, November 7, 1902. 
Mr. J. P. Gruet, Waters-Pierce Oil Company, St. Louis, Mo. 

Dear Sir: Our Mr. C. W. Norman bears with him a letter of introduction 
to you from Mr. McNall. [This is the same McNall that Gruet testified about 
occupying a desk in Wade Hampton's office at 26 Broadway and to whom the Waters- 
Pierce Oil people directed their correspondence after the so-called reorganization, as a 
blind to the fact that they were reporting to the Standard Oil Company.] Mr. 
Norman will be assisted in the work of auditing the books and accounts of the general 
office of your company by our Messrs. W. H. Henderson and W. H. Higgs. I will 
give them letters of introduction to Mr. Norman, who in turn will introduce them 
to you. Please place Mr. Norman's name on your payroll at the rate of $2,500 per 
annum, beginning with the time he leaves his home for St. Louis. Also pay his 
expense bills monthly as he renders them to you. Yours verj' truly, 

Wade Hampton." 

STANDARD OIL EXHIBIT. 

"New York, November 12, 1902. 
Mr. J. P. Gruet, Waters-Pierce Oil Company, St. Louis, Mo. 

Dear Sir: I beg to acknowledge receipt of your favor of loth inst. Answering 
your inquiry, please place Mr. Henderson's name on your payroll when he arrives in 
St. Louis, also that of Mr. Higgs, treating them the same as Mr. Norman, as far 
as salary and expenses are concerned, during their stay in St. Louis. The full names 
are W. H. Henderson, salary per annum $1,800; W. H. HSggs, salary per annum 
$1,800. Mr. Henderson should arrive in St. Louis, in a few days, but Mr. Higgs 
will probably not reach there for ten days or so. * * * 

Wade Hampton." 

STANDARD OIL EXHIBIT. 

"New York, November 24, 1902. 
Mr. J. P. Gruett, V. P. Waters-Pierce Oil Company, St. Louis, Mo. 

Dear Sir: This letter will serve to introduce to you our Mr. W. J. Higgs, who 
visits St. Louis for the purpose of assisting Mr. Norman in the auditing work. I 
wrote you some days ago concerning him. Please place his name on the payroll at 
the rate mentioned in my former letter. Any courtesies extended to Mr. Higgs will 
be much appreciated by, yours truly, 

Wade Hampton." 

HAROLD NAUDAIN, WATERS-PIERCE OIL COMPANY AUDITOR, VERIFIES 
THE VOUCHERS AND DOCUMENTS. 

(pages 172-199.) 

HAROLD NAUDAIN 

WHO was brought to Austin by John D. Johnson, general attorney for 
the Waters-Pierce Oil Company, in order that he might testify for 
Mr. Bailey, was sworn January 29th, 1907, and testified, in substance, 
as follows : 



420 Senator J. W. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

My name is Harold Naudain ; in the employ of the Waters-Pierce 
Oil Company, St. Louis, as accountant and general officeman for 
something over seventeen years. Was so engaged in 1901 and sub- 
sequent thereto. I had to do with the vouchers of the Company, ex- 
penses, etc. The body of the $3,300 voucher, dated June 30th, 1900, 
isin the handwriting of J. P. Gruet, Jr. "Account Texas cases," I be- 
lieve is in the senior Gruet's writing. The voucher is audited by my- 
self and is approved for payment by J. P. Gruet, Secretary. The re- 
ceipt is signed by H. C. Pierce. The signatures seem to be genuine. 
I should say that voucher was in the same condition as when it was au- 
dited by me. 

The voucher is further audited by D. W. Conrey, who was an au- 
ditor [from Standard Oil Company] who visited us periodically— a 
class of auditors visited the concern once a year. 

The pencil memorandum, attached to the voucher of January isth 
1900, for $1,500 is in the handwriting of A. M. Finlay, vice-president, 
and the receipt for the $1,500 is signed by H. C. Pierce. The receipt 
being in the handwriting of J. P. Gruet. The voucher is made out 
to Henry and Stribling, Waco, Texas, and is in the handwriting of 
J. P. Gruet, Jr., and it is audited by me. The "fee in anti-trust civil 
cases of State of Texas vs. Waters-Pierce Oil Company, at Waco, for 
$1,500" is not in the handwriting of either of the Gruets. 

[Finlay testified that these words were in his handwriting.] It is 
approved for payment by vice-president A. M. Finlay, and O. K.'d 
by J. D.Johnson. The memorandum is audited by H. H. Stein, one of 
the auditors I spoke of some time ago as visiting us periodically like 
Mr. Conrey. 

The endorsement on the telegram of June 12th, 1900, "S. D. 
drawn by Bailey for $1,500," "S. D." signifying, as we understand it, 
a sight draft, is in Mr. Finlay's handwriting. The statement on the 
face of the $1,500 voucher stating that the draft had been attached or 
pinned to the voucher, is in my handwriting and I undoubtedly made 
it in due course of business. If the draft had not been attached at the 
time I examined and audited that voucher, I would have made some 
notation with reference to its absence. Mr. Finlay might have in- 
structed me to have a voucher made, saying there would be a draft 
presented and to have the voucher ready, or something to that efifect. 

The voucher for $1,750 "as per letter J. W. B. herewith attached, 
dated May 28th," was audited by A. J. Hutchinson, general book- 
keeper of the company, and a Mr. W. J. Higgle whom I don't know. 

The vouchers are all approved for payment by J. P. Gruet, Secre- 
tary, and audited by the book-keeper. The voucher in favor of 
H. C. Pierce for $3,100, dated November 20th, 1900, [and for which 
sum J. D. Johnson said Pierce had given him his personal check to be 
delivered "to Stribling] is approved for payment by C. M. Adams, 
Treasurer, and audited by W. H. Glancey, chief clerk of the account- 
ing department. It is also audited on the back by H. H. Stein, a 
visiting auditor. [Just another soft name for a Standard Oil Au- 
ditor.] The receipt is signed by H. C. Pierce. 



The Political Lifc-Story of a Fallen Idol 421 

The signature on the $200 voucher, dated November 23rd, 1900, 
amount paid J. W. Bailey, account Texas cases, all appear to be gen- 
uine. The voucher $3,300 is charged to bills receivable in voucher 
record No. 20 and was posted in the general ledger, folio 246. [As 
shown by the bookkeeper Hutchinson as well as by Gruet's testimony, 
this $3,300 item, like all other items of money paid to Bailey, was sub- 
sequently transferred from bills receivable to legal expense account, 
then finally charged ofif to profit and loss and never paid back to the 
company. Bailey has frequently said that because this $3,300 was 
charged to bills receivable it became an asset of the Waters-Pierce 
Oil Company. That was only a subterfuge trick to carry it, for a 
while, as a bill receivable or an asset and then charge it to legal ex- 
pense and finally to profit and loss. This is just another illustra- 
tion, out of a multiplied number, of Bailey's deceptions and efforts 
to blind the people.] 

Voucher F 463, same date as the $3,300 voucher, is also payable to 
H. C. Pierce and is described as "amount paid out in connection with 
personal indictment and penalty suit and forfeiture of license suit 
from March 21st to June ist, 1900," and the amount paid $2,067.07. 
[This voucher was a new voucher not included in those in the posses- 
sion of the attorney-general of Texas. It was simply discovered in the 
voucher record book then before the Committee accidently, and the 
question arises as to what Mr. Pierce did with $2,067.07 in an effort to 
get the Texas indictment case against him dismissed ? No one will ever 
know, perhaps, as Bailey and his Attorneys so managed the affair as 
to keep the sub-committee from going to St. Louis, or elsewhere out 
of Texas, to get Mr. Pierce's testimony.] 

Voucher F 86 dated June 15th, 1900, in favor of Henry and 
Taylor, described as "fee account State of Texas vs. Waters-Pierce 
Oil Company, $1,500," is charged to legal expenses and posted to the 
general ledger on folio 322. 

The books in the home office would show what became of the 
$8,000 [Bailey-Pierce] note. 

There is a journal register that will show what items are charged 
off to profit and loss and not paid. 

From the books, as an expert book-keeper, I would say that 
Henry & Stribling got the money. [Through Bailey.] 

At the time these transactions were had, Mr. Gruet was in full 
charge of that [accounting] department and I think was in full sym- 
pathy with its purposes and I have no reason to suggest now that at 
that time Mr. Gruet would have caused an improper record to have 
been made. The controversy with the Waters-Pierce Oil Company 
and J. P. Gruet came on about a year ago [1906] and he has not had 
charge of the oil company's business since 1905. 

Voucher L, 92 dated November 20th, 1900, in favor of H. C. 
Pierce for amount paid to J. D. Johnson for distribution, account 
Waco, Texas, legal services on account of State against W. P. Oil Co., 
$3,100, is in the handwriting of J. P. Gruet, Jr., and is charged to 



422 Senator J. W. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

legal expenses. [This voucher says that J. D. J. distributed that 
$3,100 at Waco, Texas, for "legal services State of Texas against W. 
P. Oil Co." Johnson says he paid it to Stribling for lobbying the 
next year. Which is more likely to be the truth, the written record 
made at the time or Johnson's statement about it afterwards in order 
to avoid a charge of bribery?] 

A. M. Finlay, vice-president, ran a pencil through "Stribling and 
Taylor" and then wrote "Henry & Stribling, fees, Waco civil cases," 
and I believe that the addition "anti-trust civil cases" was made on 
the voucher by A. J. Hutchinson. [The reason that Taylor's name 
originally appeared on this document was this: Taylor was the 
County Attorney of McClennan County before Cullen F. Thomas 
was elected and it was Taylor who first instituted the suit on behalf 
of the State of Texas and employed Stribling to assist him~hence 
the confusion of Taylor's name with Henry's.] 



The Political life-Story of a Fallen Idol 423 



ANTIDOTES FOR BAILEYISM. 



The private pick-pocket picks private pockets, but the public 
political pick-pocket picks all the people's pockets. — The Author. 

So nigh is grandeur to our dust, so near is God to man, when duty- 
whispers low, "Thou must," the youth replies, "I can." — Emerson. 

This is the feeling that gives a man true courage — the feeling that 
he has a work to do at all costs; the sense of duty. — C. Kingsley. 

The superior man is slow in his words and earnest in his conduct. 
— Confucius. 

The more you speak of yourself, the more you are likely to lie. — 
Emerson. 

Do you wish men to speak well of you? Then never speak well 
of yourself. — Pascal. 

The personal pronoun, "I," might well be the coat of arms of some 
individuals. — Rivarol. 

We should ask concerning those who seek public office, not so 
much as to their party affiliations, as to whether or not they are honest 
men or grafters. — The Author. 

A sudden lie may sometimes be only manslaughter upon truth; 
but by a carefully constructed equivocation truth is always, with mal- 
ice aforethought, deliberately murdered. — Morley. 

From the errors of others a wise man corrects his own. — Publius 
Syrus. 

To make no mistakes is not in the power of man; but from their 
errors and mistakes the wise and good learn wisdom for the future. — 
Plutarch. 

Evasion, like equivocation, comes generally from a cowardly or 
a deceiving spirit, or from both; afraid to speak out its sentiments, or 
from guile concealing them. — Anon. 

Example is the school of mankind; they will learn at no other. — 
Burke. 

The political boss is a political carbuncle. From his festering 
fingers flow political pus and putrifaction. These carry with them 
a fatal gangrene which cause death to civic virtue and political right- 
eousness. — The Author. 

So act that your principle of action might safely be made a law for 
the whole world. — Kant. 



424 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

The innocence of the intention abates nothing of the mischief of 
the example. — Robert Hall. 

Live with wolves, and you will learn to howl. — Spanish Proverb. 

Not the cry, but the flight of the wild duck, leads the flock to fly 
and follow. — Chinese Proverb. 

Example teaches better than precept. It is the best modeler of 
the character of men and women. To set a lofty example is the rich- 
est bequest a man can leave behind him. — S. Smiles. 

The political grafter and the political boss, when not twin brothers 
are one and the same individual. — The Author. 

Who shoots at the midday sun, though sure he shall never hit the 
mark, yet sure he is that he shall shoot higher than he who aims but 
at a bush. — Sir P. Sidney. 

Lift up thyself, look around, and see something higher and 
brighter than earth, earth worms, and earthly darkness. — Richter. 

The language of excitement is at best but picturesque merely. 
You must be calm before you can utter oracles. — Thoreau. 

Expedients are for an hour, but principles are for the ages. — 
H. W. Beecher. 

I would like to see our public records disclose every official act, 
and be open to all, to the end that everyone shall know that in Texas 
public office is the center of public conscience, and that no graft, no 
crime, no public wrong, shall ever stain or corrupt our state. — James 
S. Hogg. 

Burn your instructions and follow your conscience. Conscience 
is the only sure clue that will eternally guide a man clear of all doubts 
and inconsistencies. — Jefferson to La Fayette. 

Party organization, in a government like ours, is quite natural and 
necessary. The evil, no less than the good, of party organization, 
however, is confined to no particular party, — The Author. 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 425 



CHAPTER XVIII. 

EVIDENCE REVIEWED, ANALYZED AND DIS- 
CUSSED— Continued. 

PIERCE-BAILEY LOANS NEVER PAID AND ALL CHARGED TO PROFIT AND 
LOSS ON BOOKS OF THE WATERS-PIERCE OIL COMPANY. 

Mr. A. J. Hutchinson, for thirty years an employe of the Waters- 
Pierce Oil Company, was called as a witness and testified (Bailey In- 
vest. Com. Report, 1907, pp. 761 to 805) in substance as follows: 

My home is in St. Louis. I came from Oklahoma City here. My 
occupation is traveling auditor for the Waters-Pierce Oil Company 
and have been employed by the Waters-Pierce Oil Company since 
1879; have served them since that time, from office boy up. My age 
now is forty years. In the year 1900 I was general bookkeeper in the 
St. Louis office and I had charge of the general books of the Company, 
from the year 1890 until July, 1903. 

Mr. J. P. Gruet, Jr., was brought in the office first just as a general 
clerk and did anything that he was required. From that position he 
was advanced to voucher clerk in time. 

HUTCHINSON EXPLAINS BOOKS TO THE COMMITTEE. 

The witness Hutchinson (continuing p. 761) — 

Well, you have two accounts payable voucher records here, one 
journal voucher record. You have two general ledgers and you have 
the private ledger and journal. 

I kept those two general ledgers at the time, and all the other work 
was under my charge, to a certain extent. I had charge of these books 
from December, 1890, until July, 1903. 

I know from the public prints that I have heard something of a 
voucher of $8,000 and one for $3,300 and one for another sum that 1 
do not recall, and which it was said Senator Bailey was connected 
with. At the time they passed through the books I did not know any- 
thing more about them than the books showed. When they were 
first made out I knew they were in the books because I had to post the 
items in the ledgers. There was one voucher for $8,000; another one 
was for $3,300. [Those were the tvvo larger amounts which showed 
on the face of the transactions that they went direct to Mr. Bailey.] 
The other voucher, which I do not recall definitely, was a voucher 
for $2,067 ^r"^ some cents. [No one knows what Johnson did with 
this latter amount, except that he "distributed" it in Texas for the ac- 
count of the Waters-Pierce Oil Company, from March to June, 
1901.] 

OTHER WITNESSES COULD BE FOUND IN ST. LOUIS. 

The witness Hutchinson (continuing pp. 792-794) — 

Mr. Pierce had a clerk at that time by the name of Collins. I 



426 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

always understood that he took care of his private affairs. I think he 
is still in St. Louis. Collins left Mr. Pierce's employ previous to the 
time that J. P. Gruet left the Waters-Pierce Oil Company. 

I know J. A. Stewart, Mr. Pierce's stenographer, he is in the St. 
Louis office now. 1 have heard that Mr. Collins was with the Amer- 
ican Car & Foundry Company. 

C. AL Adams was treasurer at the time this $8,000 cash item passed 
through the records. He is still treasurer of the Company and sup- 
posed to be in St. Louis. 

Mr. E. H. Avery was cashier in i90o-'oi. He is now assistant 
treasurer of the Company. [All of these witnesses could doubtless 
have thrown additional light on Bailey's dealings with the Oil Trust, 
if the Committee had cared to get their testimony.] 

Q. Is the company paying your expenses here, Mr. Hutchinson? 

A. I don't know who are paying my expenses. 

Q. Are you keeping your account? 

A. I certainly am. 

Q. With a view of turning it in to the Company? 

A. I expect somebody to pay it. 

Q. Do you expect your time to go on? 

A. I certainly do. 

''private" bookkeeping methods of the oil trust. 

The witness Hutchinson (continuing) — 

By Mr. Cocke: 

Q. Why do you use this private ledger in connection with the 
general ledger — I don't want to drift too far away — and be brief 
about it, kindly, please, Mr. Hutchinson. 

A. So that every Tom, Dick and Harry in the office can't see 
what is in there. It doesn't belong to them. These books here lay 
out in the main office where the office boy can go through them if he 
is the only one there. He has no right to do it. 

Q. Well, there are things about the office of such private nature 
that they are kept under lock and key, so to speak, is that true? 

A. These books are always kept in the safe. 

Q. Well, how is it you reduced the size so much in transferring 
from the general ledger — you will pardon my ignorance of bookkeep- 
ing, Mr. Hutchinson. 

Mr. Odell — Your honor, they will have to run a bookkeeping 
school here. It develops no possible facts in the general charges. We 
insist that the general system of the company in keeping these books 
has no possible reference to the charges made here. It is not insisted 
that Senator Bailey ever saw the books in his life or an entry in them 
until they were brought here before this committee and some three or 
four of these items in question examined. Now, we object in the first 
place because it consumes time, and in the second place because it is 
immaterial and irrelevant; and in the next place it is an insinuation in 
a man's mind of probably how the book ought to be kept, when Sena- 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 427 

tor Bailey here is shown not to have any connection with it. On the 
other hand, it has positively been shown he had no such connection. 

The witness Hutchinson (continuing) — Such items as this $8,000 
voucher can not go through the voucher records; these items passed 
through the cash book. I do not know why the cash book is not here. 
The difference between the cash voucher going through the cash book 
[which they did not produce] and the other voucher here that did not 
go through the cash book is, one voucher is simply a casli payment 
and shows the receipt, and enters the cash book, and the other is an 
accounts payable voucher and goes through the voucher record, re- 
quiring some length of time. Cash transactions are disposed of im- 
mediately, and will be disclosed by the cash books only, and they 
would be the original books of entry, of course. 

Q. If this committee should undertake to search for the expendi- 
ture of a five thousand item, how would we go about it? 

A. I presume you would have to go and get all the books they 
have got and go through them and look for it. 

WATERS-PIERCE NEVER REPAID. 

The witness Hutchinson (continuing p. 792) — 
Mr. Jenkins — Well, the record shows that all these matters were 
discharged for legal services? 

A. Yes, sir. [And yet Bailey admitted to Francis, so Francis 
swore, that he performed no legal service for Pierce nor the Waters- 
Pierce Oil Company, but simply practiced influence on account of his 
(Bailey's) friendship for Francis. What a deceitful fraud, what a 
shameful subterfuge, what a disgraceful act of traitorism to practice 
in the name of friendship!] 

WATERS-PIERCE OIL COMPANY NOT IN MONEY LENDING BUSINESS. 

The witness Hutchinson (continuing p. 775) — 

Q. Do you know whether or not he had any instructions from 
Mr. Pierce to keep these papers separate from the usual files of the 
company? 

A. I do not know anything about that. 

Q. You won't say he did not, will you, Mr. Hutchinson? 

A. I do not know anything about it. 

Q. You have said something about inconsistencies and unusual 
situations. Does not this whole series of transactions involve a some- 
what usual list of experiences for the employes of the company in the 
entries, etc., and in the disbursement of this money? 

A. I can not say that it does. 

Q. Was the company in the money lending business? 

A. Bills receivable will show here how much they had out. 

Q. Well, were they in the habit of loaning money to public men ? 

A. You will find from the records there that there are a couple 
of employes on their carrying amounts. 



428 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

Q. But that is not my question? 

A. Well, that is lending money, isn't it? 

Q. Well, but to public men, I will say. 

A. You will find a loan there to some levee district. That is 
public money, isn't it? 

Q. It might be, I am just making the inquiry. 

A. That is as far as my knowledge goes. 

Q. Well, the company was not in the money lending business, 
was it? 

A. They were not money lenders. 

HANGER AND ODELL OBJECT AS USUAL TO TURNING ON THE LIGHT. 

The witness Hutchinson (continuing on p. 771) — 

Q. You testified a while ago that the aggregate amount charged 
ofif to profit and loss as a result of expenses having been incurred on 
account of legal expenditures as being $11,500, June 30, 1900. Can 
you readily turn to the journal there and analyze for us the items con- 
stituting that $11,500? 

Mr. Hanger — ^We object, because that amount is not to legal ex- 
penses, as I remember it. I do not think that ought to go in the record. 

Mr. Cocke — I will leave it to the books. 

Q. Well, now, can you tell from the journal before you, and if 
not, where can we find out, what the Waters-Pierce Oil Company 
spent on account of legal expenses in Texas during the years of 1900 
and 1 901 ? 

Mr. Odell — Now, Mr. Chairman, as a matter of courtesy to these 
gentlemen who have brought their books here, we object to an exami- 
nation of this kind and protest against it as being wholly immaterial 
and irrelevant. 

The Chairman — I think the objection is well taken. I think the 
question is entirely too sweeping to ask what they spent in 1900 in 
Texas. I think the question is entirely too sweeping on the proposi- 
tion of covering the entire years of 1900 and 1901 and showing every 
legal expense that might be incurred in the State. If you will confine 
yourself to the charges I will allow the question ; but as to the question 
asked I sustain the objection. 

Q. Well, can you tell us from the books before you, and if not, 
where we can find it, what the Waters-Pierce Oil Company spent in 
connection with its readmission to the State of Texas in the year 1900 
by the way of legal expense? 

A. That is virtually the same question asked before, isn't it? 

The Chairman — No, it is a different question. Answer it if you 
can. 

(Question read.) 

Mr. Hanger — We submit that is the same question. 

The Chairman — The question is, can he tell? 

A. Well, the records will speak for themselves. 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 429 

Q. I would like to have them speak. Tell us what the records 
say on the subject. 

A. I will have to go through them for the two years. 

Q. I am confining the question now to 1900. 

A. I will have to go all the way through the books for the year 
1900 to find what is in there on that account and you have not got the 
books here. [Why did not they bring the balance of the books and 
vouchers, or let the sub-committee go to St. Louis, Washington and 
New York and find out the truth about their brilliant Senator?] 

The witness Hutchinson (continuing p. 773) : 

By Mr. Cocke: 

Q. Well, can you tell us what part of that $1 1,590 was expended 
by the Waters-Pierce Oil Company in Texas for re-admission or lit- 
igation purposes? 

A. I can not. 

Q. How can we find out? 

A. You will have to find out from somebody that has a better 
knowledge of that than I have, because if they had ten cases here that 
would be my knowledge, "Texas cases," I would not know what cases 
they referred to. 

Q. Well, you can tell what those fifty-four expenditures are 
there? 

A. No; not without — 

Q. Now without what? 

A. Unless the vouchers themselves carried the specific informa- 
tion. 

Q. Are the vouchers supposedly on file in St. Louis now? 

A. To the best of my knowledge they are. 

Q. Then, if the committee could find the vouchers that would 
explain those items? 

Mr. Odell: That is an opinion and conclusion, and known to be 
false that the committee could find fifty-four items there. 

Mr. Cocke: I don't see why the word "false" is used. 

Mr. Odell: I used it because I meant it. I have sat here and 
heard you undertake to browbeat and intimidate witnesses as long as 
I am going to without slapping your jaws. 

Mr. Cocke: Well, I declare. 

The Chairman: There is no use in talking that way. We will 
proceed here orderly, and let us get through with this trial. This 
is a committee acting under the rules of the district court. I think 
the question is perfectly proper, and I think you are entitled to an 
answer. 

Mr. Wolfe: Now, Mr. Chairman, let me ask a question. There 
are certain charges made here with reference to the $1,500 voucher, 
and the $3,300 voucher, and $8,000 note, and I think another one of 
$3)i50> or something of that kind. 

Mr. Robertson: $3,100. 

Mr. Wolfe: $3,100, yes, sir. That is the Stribling voucher. 



430 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

Why should not this evidence be confined to the charges, the vouchers 
and sums of money that are mentioned in the charges? 1 under- 
stood that was the ruling of the Chairman. Why should we take in 
all the expenditures of the company? It seems to me that the inquiry 
should be confined to the particular sums of money that are named 
in the charges. 

The Chairman: I think when a question is asked nobody on 
earth has a right to control counsel in asking the question, and when 
objection is made I will hear gentlemen patiently and rule positively. 

Mr. Odell: Gentlemen are expecting me to protect their rec- 
ords. 

The Chairman: If you will make an objection, I will protect 
the record, and do not let us have unseemly evidences of temper. 
You have got plenty of time to be patient about it, and I will protect 
you. 

Mr. Wolfe: Now, what was the ruling of the Chairman? 

The Chairman: I ruled that the question as I understood it was 
proper, if the vouchers would not disclose for what the expenditures 
were made. Now, if they seek to follow up that inquiry by going 
into details of the vouchers, the way to do is to make an objection and 
get a ruling on it. 

Mr. Cocke: Now, Mr. Hutchinson, will the vouchers sup- 
posedly on file with the company in St. Louis give this committee the 
fullest information obtainable as to those fifty-four expenditures 
during the first six months of 1900 with reference to the company's 
legal business in Texas? 

Mr. Odell: We object to that, because the books are the best 
evidence and there are no fifty-four items on the books which can 
reasonably be claimed pertain to Texas business. 

The Witness: I did not testify with reference to Texas cases. 

Mr. Odell: And there are certainly none with which we are 
claimed to be connected, directly or indirectly. 

The Chairman: He is not asking him the contents of the 
vouchers. He is asking if these vouchers would disclose anything if 
those vouchers would disclose information about it. 

[It is to be said to the credit of the Committee that they required 
the drunken Odell to apologize next morning for the contempt of- 
fered the Committee. Every one in the Committee room, when this 
incident occurred, could well see that Odell was all but beastly 
drunk. In fact he was frequently perceptibly intoxicated during the 
proceedings, and yet his boss Bailey is held up by the prohibitionists 
as a paragon of temperance.] 

Q. Well will they? [The fifty-four vouchers in St. Louis, show 
for what purposes the Waters-Pierce Oil Company spent money in 
Texas.] 

A. I don't know. 

Q. Why don't you know? 

A. Because I have not got the records before me. 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 431 

Q. You have testified with a degree of freedom and candor and 
courtesy, Mr. Hutchinson, with reference to these matters, and do 
you mean to say now that those vouchers will not be as explicit with 
reference to the balance of the expenditures as those before us? 

A. I do not know at the present time about those vouchers, 
These speak for themselves, and I will have to see the others to get 
the same information. 

Q. Don't you know as a matter of fact that that is what the 
voucher is for? 

A. The voucher is supposed to show what the expense is for. 

Q. Then will those vouchers not show what the expenditures 
are for? 

A. They may show they are for expenditures of money in Texas, 
but whether it shows any specific case. or not, I can not answer the 
question. 

The witness Hutchinson (continuing pp. 783-85) : 

Q. Mr. Hutchinson, kindly refer to the books here and see 
what was charged off to legal expense and then to profit and loss at 
the close of 1900, you having testified that the expenditures and dis- 
bursements for the same purpose at the close of June, 1900, was $1 1,- 
590 — now see what it was December 31, 1900? 

A. December 31, 1900, was $1 1,886.68. 

Q. And look at the journal on that item and analyze it for us, 
please. 

A. Do you want me to give an analysis of it as it appears here? 

Mr. Cobbs: Does that refer to these items that you have been 
speaking of, these vouchers, any of them? 

Mr. Robertson here takes the chair. 

Mr. Odell : We object, Mr. Chairman, to what the books of this 
company would show in December, 1900, on December 31, 1900, for 
the reason that is a matter not inquired into by us in the first place; 
in the second place, it is a private transaction recorded in the books 
of this company that ought not to be made public. 

The Chairman: Well, it will be restricted to matters in contro- 
versy. Restrict your inquiries, Mr. Cobbs, to items involved here 
and covered by your charges. We don't care anything about an an- 
alysis of outside matters, because in the first place it is immaterial and 
in the second place I don't regard it as the proper thing. 

Mr. Cocke: Did the Chair hear the ruling and discussion last 
night on the same point? 

The Chairman: Yes, sir. 

Mr. Cocke: With reference to closing up the books on June 
30th? 

The Chairman: I understood the ruling to be you could trace 
any of these items under investigation here anywhere you could find 
them in the book, and I don't care to limit that at all. 

Mr. Cocke: And T could ask about at least the aggregate dis- 
bursements. 



432 Senator J. W. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

The Chairman: That has been testified to $ii,ooo and odd dol- 
lars. 

Mr. Cocke: At least the number of items entering into it. 

The Chairman: I don't see that it is material unless it relates 
to this matter. 

Mr. Cocke: Of course, in my view of the case, Mr. Chairman, 
I will state it is material. 

The Chairman: I will say this, you can inquire into any matter 
that is connected with this anti-trust suit at Waco and these entries 
you have been inquiring about. 

Q. Then looking at this footing, for that purpose, can you testify 
as to what items, how many and what amounts enter into that $i i,8oo 
affect the re-admission of the Waters-Pierce Oil Company into 
Texas or the litigation then pending in the courts at Waco against the 
company or against Mr. Pierce? 

Mr. Cobbs: Mr. Chairman, I am going to make an objection 
here as to the scope of these questions. Now, we can not anticipate 
what expenses have been paid by the company in which this Commit- 
tee has no right to go on and call in question the rights of other parties. 
It is enough, Mr. Chairman, to investigate the man charged without 
investigating everybody else who might be charged or might be af- 
fected by something in this testimony reflecting upon gentlemen 
probably who would want to come here to testify. I don't know to 
whom any amounts may be paid or anything about that, but I think 
we will perform our duty when we confine the examination to any- 
thing that afifects Senator Bailey and no one else, and the scope of that 
question is so broad and the examination may be leading to so many 
different avenues that we will be here the balance of the year making 
this investigation, and for the economy of time and for protecting 
other people from having their names brought into the newspapers 
and demanding an investigation that will take up more testimony, I 
make this objection. 

(Here followed a lengthy discussion on the objection to the above 
questions.) 

The Chairman: The witness can answer that question. 

A. I can not. 

Q. Why can't you? 

A. This record does not show. 

Q. What does the record show? 

A. The record shows certain amounts expended, it does not 
show what case it is for. 

Q. Where can we get that information? 

A. The legal department of the company, I presume. 

Q. Will the vouchers on file in St. Louis disclose it? 

A. Not necessarily. 

Q. If they were as full as the vouchers here they would, would 
they not? 

A. Well, all vouchers are not thoroughly explanatory of the 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 433 

case. We make payments to Judge John D. Johnson and refer to 
Texas cases. We have half a dozen cases here. It does not refer to 
which case it is. His records show that. 

Q. Well, all these records here, all these vouchers, are e.xplana- 
tory, are they not? 

A. As far as you have them here they are. 

Q. Might we not expect to find your vouchers on file in St. 
Louis the same way? 

A. They speak for themselves. 

Mr. Cocke: Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask Judge Penn a 
question as a matter of courtesy to him — I want to look at his books. 

The Chairman: Just step over there and ask him in private, 
Mr. Cocke. 

Mr. Cocke: I would like Mr. Chairman, to have the privilege 
of examining the books now before the committee, especially the 
journals, the private ledgers that show those outlays incident to the 
re-admission and litigation then pending, and also to have the privi- 
lege to carefully go through these voucher records and ascertain 
whether or not there are any entries contained in these books that 
would throw light on the allegation that there was a conspiracy be- 
tween these parties, and that these several sums of money, especially 
the hundred thousand dollars— 

The Chairman: You want permission to examine the books 
— how long a time would it take you? 

Mr. Cocke: It will take some time. I understand counsel 
have an objection to it. 

The Chairman: I understand, just state what you want. 

Mr. Cocke: For certain purposes — I don't want to pry into the 
affairs of the company — for the purpose of ascertaining whether or 
not there is any data here that would support the charges, and I was 
only reciting the charges in mind, towit: the five thousand dollars 
and the hundred thousand dollars in addition to the items here, and 
any other items that would throw light on this investigation. I dis- 
claim any intention or any desire to ascertain any data here that 
would be injurious to this — 

ATTORNEY PENN MAKES A PLEA FOR WATERS-PIERCE. 

Mr. Penn: Mr. Chairman, these books are brought here volun- 
tarily by the Waters-Pierce Oil Company for the purpose of allow- 
ing this committee to go into them with a view of these vouchers that 
are under investigation before this committee. The company is per- 
fectly willing for the committee to have everything that is in those 
books with reference to those vouchers, but it was never contemplated 
that the members of the committee, Mr. Cocke or any one else, should 
be permitted to go into an exploring or fishing expedition into these 
books, and it was my understanding at the time that these books were 
brought here — I was the representative of the company here speaking 
for them at the time they were first brought here — that it was not the 



434 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

desire or intention of the committee to undertake to go through these 
books outside of the entries affecting these specific matters that arc 
under investigation here * * * I am the custodian of them be- 
fore this committee and on behalf of the company while tendering to 
the committee the fullest opportunity to examine all entries in these 
books relating to these vouchers, I must refuse to allow Mr. Cocke or 
any one else to go into a general examination of these books which 
will disclose all of the private business of the company, matters in 
Missouri, Oklahoma, Arkansas, Louisiana and the Republic of Mex- 
ico, with the hope of thereby discovering something having a bearing 
on this matter. If there is some specific thing in these books that has 
a bearing on this matter, let us know what it is and then you are wel- 
come to it, but we do object to any attempt at going on a fishing expe- 
dition through these books. 

(Here follows a discussion at great length between Mr. Cocke, 
Mr. Penn and members of the committee with reference to the above 
matter.) 

The Chairman: I don't think they are admissible, gentlemen. 
[One of the charges was that Pierce sent Bailey $5,000 while Bailey 
was enroute to Texas in March, 1901, to lobby before Texas Legisla- 
ture against legislation adverse to the Waters-Pierce Oil Company. 
Another charge was that Bailey had received $100,000 for his ser- 
vices to the Oil Trust. Now, Mr. Penn objects to our looking 
through the books of his company to find these items but insists "If 
there is some specific thing in these books that has a bearing on this 
matter, let us know what it is and then you are welcome to it, but we 
do object to any attempt at going on a fishing expedition through 
these books." If there were no fish in them why would he object to 
seining, much less to fishing? How could "Mr. Cocke" point out 
"some specific thing in these books" when he had had no opportunity 
and was denied the opportunity of examining them? If a man is 
charged with having stolen goods on his person or premises and he 
refuses under proper authority to be searched, what inference can we 
draw but that the stolen goods are there?] 

ATTORNEY PENN OBJECTS AGAIN ON BEHALF OF THE OIL CO. 

The witness Hutchinson (continuing p. 787) : 

Q. Passing over, Mr. Hutchinson, to the semi-annual charging 
ofif of the legal expense account to profit and loss, June 30, 1901, see 
first how much was involved in that lump sum. 

Mr. Penn: Mr. Chairman, I want to interpose an objection 
here. This witness states that he is unable to determine from these 
books what amounts, if any, these expenditures for legal expenses 
were made in relation to the matters that are under investigation be- 
fore this committee. That being the case, I ofifer the objection that 
it is immaterial here and invading the books of this company, con- 
trary to the understanding under which these books were brought 
here, to go into these books and ascertain what amount was expended 
by them for legal matters during any given period. 



The Political Life-Story of a fallen Idol 435 

The Chairman: I understood, Judge, that the question has been 
asked and answered and the amount given here. 

Mr. Cocke: Not for 1901, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Odell : Three times at least, your Honor. 

The Chairman: I don't see that the objection would be tenable, 
Judge, on that proposition as to the amount of expense; when he seeks 
to go into details I will sustain the objection. 

(Here follows another discussion on the admissibility of the 
above question.) 

Q. Now, read him the question, Mr. Stenographer. 

(Stenographer reads the question.) 

The Chairman: Can you tell what that was? 

A. I can tell what the total legal expense was for that six 
months. 

The Chairman: Go ahead, Mr. Cocke. 

Q. That's all I want to know, please, sir. 

A. The ledger here shows sixteen — 

Mr. Cobbs: I want to urge the objection to that. He can not 
show the total amount of legal expense. The Waters-Pierce Oil 
Company may have had a hundred lawsuits in Texas and may have a 
hundred attorneys employed; it may have to pay various sums of 
court costs and all this in the aggregate left unexplained would prob- 
ably be misleading and misunderstood, and require, whenever that 
sum is shown, an examination of the specific amounts, and the appli- 
cations where they were — to whom paid, to relieve a possible situa- 
tion that that might bring by the aggregate amount; and I object to 
it, because it is immaterial and irrelevant as to developing any fact 
charged against the Senator in this matter. 

The Chairman: I have ruled on the proposition. I think the 
testimony is admissible, gentlemen. If you want to go to the com- 
mittee on it — 

Mr. Cobbs: Instead of objecting, I just want to enter my pro- 
test against that ruling. 

Q. How much is the total expenditure during the first six 
months of 1901, as shown by your journal? 
A. $16,067.94. 

Mr. Robertson : Is that for the entire year? 

A. The six months ending June 30, 1901. 

Q. You are unable to analyze that, are you, from the books? 

A. I am unable to state here what the amounts were paid for. 

AUDITOR HUTCHINSON TRACES $2,067 VOUCHER THROUGH SAME 

ROUTINE. 

The witness Hutchinson (continuing p. 782) — 

It is voucher F 462, folio 27 on the voucher record. The record 
here says, "amount paid out in connection with Waco, Texas, per- 
sonal indictment and penalty suit; also State forfeiture license suit, 
from March 21, 1901, to June i. 1901, $2,067.07." [The question is 



436 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

to whom did Johnson pay this money?] That item was finally closed 
out the same as all of the others, through legal expense to the general 
ledger and from there to profit and loss on the private ledger, under 
date of June 30, 1901. [Observe that this money was paid by John- 
son "in connection with the Waco, Texas, forfeiture license suit." 
Observe also that it was paid out "from March 21, 1901, to June i, 
1901, $2,067.07." Now the penalty suit at Waco was dismissed by 
Judge Scott about the middle of November, 1900, and the Texas for- 
feiture license suit was closed out by the filing of the mandate of the 
United States Supreme Court with the clerk of the Supreme Court 
of Texas, at Austin, April 25, 1900. The same day that Bailey bor- 
rowed (?) the first $3,300 from Pierce. Why then, should Johnson 
have been paying out money on these matters from March 21 to June 
I, 1901? The personal indictment of Pierce before Judge Scott of 
Waco was the only remaining unsettled litigation at the time this 
money was disbursed.] 

THE WITNESS HUTCHINSON TRACES THE BAILEY-STRIBLING $1,500, 

JUNE, 1900, THROUGH THE BOOKS OF THE WATERS-PIERCE OIL 

COMPANY TO ITS ULTIMATE DISPOSITION — PROFIT AND LOSS. 

The witness Hutchinson (Continuing p. 769) — The $1,500 
voucher is recorded on folio 16, voucher F 86, voucher record 25 — 
folio 16 means page 16, under date of June 15, 1900, voucher F 86, 
"Henry & Stribling, Waco, Texas, fee account of State of Texas vs. 
W. P. O. Co., at Waco, $1,500." There is no other explanation and 
the amount is charged to legal expense, in general ledger No. 6, folio 
322. That entry is made June 15, and is closed out to profit and loss 
on the private ledger June 30, 1900, just 15 days after the entry was 
made. The entry was made by myself but I was the general book- 
keeper at that time. It is carried to profit and loss in the total item 
of $10,590.52, covering the legal expenses for the six months ending 
June 30, 1900. 

Q. The question was the expenses incident to the re-admission 
of the company into Texas. 

A, That is the only one I have a record of here. 

Q. Do you say that is an expense incident to that? 

A. Yes, sir; the voucher record carries that information on it — 
"Fees account of State of Texas vs. W. P. O. Co., at Waco." 

I am here to testify to the correctness of these entries here and fol- 
low them up through the books. 

Q. Then we are to understand that there is nothing unusual or 
inconsistent with the due order of business in the notation referred to 
as having been made by Mr. Naudain? 

A. No; you will find on a great many vouchers where papers 
have been detached for dififerent purposes. 

Q. If Mr. Pierce had wanted the draft that was attached to those 
papers in the manner of conducting your clerical afifairs, would he 
likely have called on Mr. Gruet for it, being at the head of the ac- 
counting department? 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 437 

A. He certainly would. 

Q, How is that, sir? 

A. He certainly would. 

Q. Then there is nothing unusual in making the request on Mr. 
Gruet's part on Mr. Naudain to let him have that draft for deliv- 
ery to Mr. Pierce, is there? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. No suspicion to be cast upon it on that account? 

A. None in my mind. 

Q. Have you any explanation to ofifer the committee as to why 
this receipt taking the place of the voucher should be dated June 
15th? 

A. No, I have no explanation to make, other than that the re- 
sult would naturally follow that the receipt would be dated the same 
as the vouchers. 

Q. Even though it was dated in November when the draft was 
detached? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. There would be nothing inconsistent in that, would there? 

A. No, I don't think so. 

As bookkeeper of that concern, that last endorsement on the bot- 
tom of the $1,500 voucher, "draft attached," would indicate that 
there had been a draft attached to the voucher by the cashier after it 
had passed through the voucher department. 

THE WITNESS HUTCHINSON TRACES $8,000 BAILEY LOAN ACCOUNT 
"TEXAS LEGISLATION" 19OO. 

The witness Hutchinson (Continuing p. 765) — 

The first record we have of the $8,000 voucher is in the ledger. 
It is posted under date of March 6 from the cash book, folio 119, 
$8,000. [That was just 2 days after Pierce had written Gruet from 
New York (March 4, 1901) "have given Bailey my check" for $8,- 
000. Just six days after Bailey had executed it at Washington, D. C, 
March i, 1900, his little promissory note for $8,000 which finally 
took the course of all these dealings and found its way to the profit 
and loss account of the Waters-Pierce Oil Company. 

The first place, this entry of Pierce is in the ledger. We have no 
other book of original entry here. Under date of March this cash 
book, folio 119, $8,000, charged to bills receivable, folio 246 on the 
ledger, that is, ledger 6, page 246. I made this posting. 

Ledger 6 is discontinued December 31, 1901, and ledger No. 7 
opened January 2, 1902, which shows the transfer from one ledger 
to the other, $8,000 to bills receivable. Voucher F 36 transfers it 
from this ledger No. 7 to the private ledger, June 30, 1902, — See 
private ledger A — i, page 3, June 30th, where it is charged ofif to 
profit and loss. 

We have not got that personal voucher record here. There is 
an entry under date of June 30, 1902, charged to profit and loss, bills 



438 Senator J. W. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

receivable $8,000. The original entry was made by myself. It in- 
dicates it was charged to profit and loss, $8,000. That is the last en- 
try on the books referring to the $8,000 voucher. 

STANDARD OIL AUDITS BAILEY'S LOANS. 

The witness Henry (continuing pp. 77B-779) : 

Q. Then this voucher was audited and this disbursement ap- 
proved in December, 1902, after it matured June, 1901, and after it 
had been charged of?, charged first to bills receivable, then to legal 
expense, and then finally charged ofif to profit and loss, June 30, 
1902? 

A. The audit to December, 1902, had nothing to do with ap- 
proving the voucher. That didn't come in the province of the au- 
ditor to approve whether the voucher was made or should be paid, 
or anything like that, it just simply proved the voucher had been 
properly put through the books and proper entries made. 

Q. What was the purpose of the December, 1902, audit? 

A. It was an audit made periodically, went over the books to 
see that the entries were properly made and all the work taken proper 
care of. 

Q. Did the auditor complain to you when he handed you the 
account there was anything wrong with this disbursement? 

A. None whatever. 

Q. Was that a Standard Oil Company auditor? 

A. I don't know who it was; it was Mr. C. W. Norman, is my 
recollection. 

Q. Do you know who Mr. Norman was representing in this 
auditing? 

A. No. 

Q. Then are you to draw any suspicious inference from the ap- 
pearance of J. W. B. when it is in an exact accord with the body of 
the voucher? 

A. No; you will not draw any inference from that, but you 
naturally violate the general rule of the book that this does not show 
anything of the kind except that one item. 

Q. Well, the book is made to conform to the voucher, isn't it? 

A. It is made to conform to the other books. 

Q. And to the voucher? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. This is the original entry, isn't it? 

A. It is. 

Q. And this in no way changes the fact of what it is? 

A. I don't think so. 

Q. Well, as the head of your accounting department, had not 
Mr. Gruet the authority to make any entries he thought proper that 
would amplify or explain any of these references? 

A. I would not question his authority. 

The items charged off to profit and loss from the private ledger 



The Political Lifc-Siory of a Fallen Idol 439 

to total legal expenses for the six months ending June 30, 1902, was 
$16,110.75. This includes the $8,000 item, as well as $8,110.75 ^^^ 
the two constitute the amount of legal expense charged olif at that 
period. 

A. Well, if it had been paid — 

Q. Then what would you have done with it? 

A. If it had been paid then the acount should carry the credit. 
That is, if the amount had been paid and the company got the money 
it would naturally be credited to same account to which it was 
charged when it was paid out. 

Q. Do those books show that? 

A. They do not show it. 

WITNESS TR.\CES $3,300 TRANSACTION. 

The witness Hutchinson (continuing p. 763) : 

This entry here [in voucher record No. 25 which the witness was 
examining] of date June 30, 1900, voucher F 462, in favor of H. C. 
Pierce, $3,300, is carried over here to "bills receivable" in the general 
ledger. The item $3,300 is posted on folio 246 of the ledger under 
date of June 30, voucher F 462, initials J. W. B., from voucher folio 
27, $3,300. The notation there "J. W. B." is in my handwriting and 
is to designate the items so that they can be readily identified. The 
next disposition of the item is on October 31st, journal voucher K 
631, journal voucher folio 120, this $3,300 is transferred from his 
account [Bailey's]. Bills receivable is credited with $3,300 and it 
is charged to legal expenses in the handwriting of \V. H. Glancy. 
He was chief clerk in the office at that time, and during this month I 
was in Mexico City, and he was in charge of the books at that time. 
The item goes to ledger 6, page 323 and was charged to legal ex- 
pense. From there the item was charged to profit and loss in 
June. [This means that they carried Bailey's receipt or note, 
as the case may have been, for $3,300 for four months and then at its 
maturity, instead of having him or Pierce pay it back to the company, 
they simply charged it to legal expense and legal expense was after- 
wards, on December 31st, charged to profit and loss, as will after- 
wards appear.] 

This entry was made by Mr. Glancy during my absence. He 
had charge of the work. 

Yes, sir; there is another record in the books of this $3,300 
voucher. We left off where the voucher was here to legal expense 
October 31st, voucher 861, transfer of account folio 130, $3,300 — cash 
book i2£» is not here — 

Q. Now, is that the final entry that you have with reference to 
this item? 

A. No, this is where the entry from the general ledger goes from 
this into the private ledger. 

Q. All right, the private entry, if you have it. 

A. Under date of December 31, 1900, legal expense was closed 

1—30 



440 Senator J. W. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

out of this ledger into private ledger by voucher No. — ; total amount 
$11,888.68. 

Judge Poindexter: What book is that — private ledger what? 

A. A- 1. The journal entry for that distributes this $11,888.68 
to ten different accounts. I am on folio 39 of the private journal. 
This journal entry here is distributing $1 1,888.68, and it is distributed 
to ten different accounts. The $3,300 is embodied in an item of $1 1,- 
237.27, and is charged to profit and loss. 

Q. At what time? 

A. December 31, 1900. [The proponent of the charges after- 
wards tried to find out from the witness what the balance of this $11,- 
237.27 was spent for but inasmuch as the vouchers for the money 
were in St. Louis the witness could not tell and the committee finally 
refused to send the sub-committee North and East where it might 
have found out these things.] 

All legal expense items are closed out in June and December 
and distributed to their proper accounts. 

Yes, sir; profit and loss is the final entry on the books with refer- 
ence to this item. 

The $3,300 voucher would indicate on its face — would lead me 
to believe Mr. Pierce had made the payment to Mr. Bailey and was 
getting a return from the Company. 

A. It is signified to my mind that Mr. Pierce had advanced the 
money out of his personal — 

Mr. Looney: I don't think we can try this case on inferences 
and conclusions. 

The Chairman: He is testifying as an expert bookkeeper as to 
what the books indicate. 

Senator Looney: I understand that an expert's testimony is ad- 
missible only on an expert proposition. Any man can judge of that. 
If you propose to introduce him as an expert — 

The Chairman: I understood that is the capacity in which he is 
testifying. 

Senator Looney: Then I raise the objection that this is not a 
scientific proposition that an expert knows anything more about than 
any other common layman. 

The Chairman: I overrule the objection. 

Q. What does it indicate, Mr. Hutchinson? 

A. It indicates that Mr. Pierce had made a payment that was 
proper for the company to make, and was being reimbursed by this 
voucher. 

Q. What does the $3,300 entry mean, just in plain English? 
Does it mean Mr. Pierce had loaned $3,300 for the benefit of the 
Waters-Pierce Oil Company and had taken a note and turned the 
note over to them or had taken a due bill or some evidence of indeb- 
tedness? 

Mr. Cobbs: I think I will object to that question, asking for a 
conclusion of a witness who is a bookkeeper, whether or not it was 
done for the benefit of the Waters-Pierce Oil Company. 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 441 

Mr. Jenkins: I am not asking for whose benefit it is done. 

Mr. Cobbs: I would hate to be tried on questions of that sort, 
when it is somebody's else transactions, a transaction for somebody 
else. 

Mr. Jenkins: These entries mean something or they mean noth- 
ing. We are entitled to know what it is. 

Mr. Robertson (as Chairman) : I think the question is proper. 

Mr. Cobbs: Note my protest to that. 

A. The entry shows Mr. Pierce had made some kind of a pay- 
ment and through this voucher got it from the company. 

THE WITNESS HUTCHINSON TRACES $I,750 BAILEY-PIERCE LEGISLA- 
TIVE VOUCHER OF JUNE, 1901. 

The witness Hutchinson (continuing p. 761): The $1,750 
voucher is found in voucher record 25, folio 96, under date of June 
II, 1901, voucher F 41, "J- W. Bailey, Texas cases, $1,750." The 
voucher record here shows "J. W. B." over something that has been 
scratched out. The original explanation of the voucher has been 
scratched out and "Texas cases" put in. 

Q. Well, now, what would cause the change? That is what I 
am undertaking to get at. 

A. Well, sometimes you would make a voucher and put it in, 
and you would find your voucher had been paid — the bill had been 
paid, and the voucher was made the second time and we would pass 
it through without noticing it, and we would make out the voucher 
and put it in the voucher record and then we would discover it and 
go to work and scratch the record out and use that line again for an- 
other voucher. 

Q. Well, what else? 

A. That is about the only reason that there should be a voucher 
canceled in that manner. [Bailey and his lawyers tried to make a 
great bugaboo of the crosses on the t's and the dots over the i's but a 
careful reading of the testimony of their own witness in its entirety 
will show that there is absolutely no foundation, in fact, for a shadow 
of suspicion to rest upon or any question to be raised with reference to 
the substantial regularity of every item involved and its accurate 
representation and disclosure by vouchers, letters and telegrams and 
books of the Waters-Pierce Oil Company; and Bailey and his boos- 
ters have cried forgery, theft, burglary and blackmail in order to di- 
vert the attention of the people from the fearful guilt of this bold, 
bad man.] 

The witness Hutchinson (continuing about $1,750 item, p. 768) 
— That item is charged to legal expense on ledger No. 6, page 324, 
under date, June nth. It is all my handwriting— posting to legal 
expense, folio 324, ledger 6, voucher F 41, folio 96, $1,750. // follows 
the same routine through the book to profit and loss. It appears 
under January 1 1 to legal expense and on June 30, 1901, to profit and 
loss. That is charged off to profit and loss. That is charged ofT the 



442 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

whole account, you understand, the whole legal expense for the six 
months, from June [January, he means,] first to June 30th. 

It was charged to legal expense on June nth, 19 days later it is 
charged ofif to profit and loss — it is transferred to the private ledger, 
to profit and loss, and that is the end of it. 

Q. Is the voucher register or record made up from the voucher 
or is the voucher made up from the register? 

A. The voucher is made up first. 

Q. Then taking this $1,750 voucher as a basis from which to 
make your voucher records or register, is it not true that the entries 
made in the voucher register wherein you claim that the name of 
J. W. Bailev had been written over a previous erasure, does in fact at 
this time represent the correct entry to be drawn from this voucher? 

A. Yes. 

Q. You will find fifty corrections, won't you, throughout that 
register? 

A. I presume so. 

Here it is, June i ith, voucher F 41. 

Q. Now, what is the body of the reference thereto? 

A. J. W. B., Texas cases, $1,750. 

Q. All of which is in your handwriting? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Now, comparing that entry with the voucher, the voucher 
being the basis of the entry, and reading, "W. P. Oil Company to 
J. W. Bailey, Debtor, Gainesville, Texas, for expenses account Texas 
matters," is there anything inconsistent between the entry as you made 
it in the book and the body of the voucher as disclosed by the 
voucher? 

A. None whatever. 

AUDITOR HUTCHINSON TRACES $3,IOO STRIBLING VOUCHER OF NOVEM- 
BER 21, 1900, TO PROFIT AND LOSS. 

The witness Hutchinson (continuing p. 781) — The $3,100 
voucher dated November 20, 1900, is made payable to H. C. Pierce. 
The voucher reads for amount advanced to J. D. Johnson paid out 
by him for account of W. P. O. Co., in connection with Waco, Texas, 
penally suits. It was the proper routine for the $3,100 voucher to 
take the same course as the other vouchers, namely, charge against 
legal expense and thence to profit and loss. 

AUDITOR HUTCHINSON TRACES $200 PIERCE-BAILEY VOUCHER TO 
PROFIT AND LOSS. 

The witness Hutchinson (continuing p. 780) — This $200 voucher 
of date November 23, 1900 [the next day after Francis sent Bailey his 
$1,500 draft and $3,300 receipt and the next day after Stribling col- 
lected his $3,100] in favor of H. C. Pierce, amount paid J. W. Bailey, 
account Texas cases, was audited by W. H. Galncy and signed in 
person by H. C. Pierce. It takes exactly the same course. It ap- 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 443 

pears on folio 323, of ledger No. 6, under November 23rd, and is 
transferred to the private ledger under date of December 31, 1902, 
to the general profit and loss account from the legal expense ac- 
count in the general ledger. It stayed in legal expense from Novem- 
ber 23 to December 31 when it was charged off. 

Q. Then the only dilTerence in that entry and the $3,300 entry is 
that the $3,300 was carried for a period of four months in bills re- 
ceivable and then transferred? 

A. To legal expense. 

Q. To legal expense; and thence at the close of the fiscal year to 
profit and loss? 

A. To profit and loss; they both go through in the same item. 

Q. So far as the company's records are concerned, they reach 
the same end, do they not? 

A. Reach the same end at the same time. 

Q. And properly so from the bookkeeping records? 

A. Yes, sir. 

george clark of waco testifies for the standxvrd oil senator 
from texas. 

Mr. Clark 

being sworn, testified (Bailey Investigation Committee Report, pp. 
164-170), as follows: 

I live at Waco, Texas. I was representing the Waters-Pierce 
Oil Company in the controversy at Waco, in connection with Mr. 
Johnson, in criminal and civil cases. 

I think that [Clark's letter to Johnson, dated November 15th, 
1900, referring to "our friend will probably be there on Monday 
morning"] refers to Mr. Stribling, but I am not sure. I think it 
does. I have no idea what Mr. Johnson referred to in his letter of 
August 2nd, as having "sent on to Bailey and Pierce." I have no 
idea what he referred to as the "policy agreed on between you and 
him." 

I do remember having written Mr. Johnson that he had best have 
Mr. Bailey communicate with Stribling; that he was "very restless 
and dissatisfied at the outcome here on last Friday and threatened, 
privately, to us, to institute proceedings and have a receiver ap- 
pointed," and so on. Mr. Stribling threatened very seriously. 
He was very indignant because the new Waters-Pierce Oil Company 
had been admitted and the old company had died, and that, of course, 
was the end of his case. [If his case was dead, why then did they 
loan Stribling, through Bailey, $i,i;oo about the i^th of June, 1900, 
and pay him $3,100 in November, 1900?] He was indignant and he 
threatened to apply for a receivership of the Waters-Pierce Oil Com- 
pany to extend throughout the State of Texas, and thereby to do 
something, — I don't know what, now. I wrote the fact to Mr. John- 
son, my leading counsel in the case, and informed him what Mr. 



444 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

Stribling threatened, and suggested to him that, as Mr. Bailey and 
Mr. Stribling were old friends, and from the same State, and had 
been to college together, he might get Mr. Bailey to write to him. 

The reason I was asking Senator Bailey to help in the matter was 
because Senator Bailey, as a friendly act, as I understood, — I did not 
see him and I did not talk with him, — had consented to come down 
and see if there was any way to get the Waters-Pierce Oil Company 
reinstated in Texas. It was by reason of the fact that Stribling and 
Mr. Bailey were intimate friends, had been at college together, at the 
law school at Lebanon, and were very friendly, and spoke of each 
other as "Joe" and "Oscar," and for that reason a letter from Mr. 
Bailey, if one could be procured, might serve to hold Stribling still 
until the final proceedings were taken in Judge Scott's court to dis- 
miss the case. [It seems Bailey possibly put up a job on the Waters- 
Pierce Oil Company by pretending to negotiate the loan for Stribling 
of the $1,500, pocketing the money himself and then "stilling" 
Stribling by such a letter as Judge Clark suggested. Of course, just 
how he managed to "hold Stribling still" is one of the undiscovered 
mysteries of this story.] 

T stated to my leading counsel the fact of newspaper agitation and 
gave the facts, as I understood them at that time, which was my duty 
as an attorney in the case and in that same connection I wrote him 
"you had best have Mr. Bailey communicate with Stribling." 

0. L. STRIBLING ANGRILY TELLS HIS STORY. 

Oscar L. Stribling, a member of the former law partnership of Waco, Texas, 
known as Henry & Stribling, which firm originally represented the State in conjunc- 
tion with County Attorney Taylor and later County Attorney Thomas, in the penalty 
suit against the Waters-Pierce Oil Company, at Waco, for $105,000, which suit 
was still pending when Mr. Bailey became sponsor for the oil trust, was summoned 
by the proponent of the charges to appear before the Investigation Committee of 
1907, and testified (Bailey Investigation Committee Report, 1907, pages 338-353 and 
360-370) in part as follows: 

My name is Oscar L. Stribling, commonly known as O. L. Strib- 
ling. I live at Waco and am an attorney-at-law. The firm of 
Henry & Stribling were employed by J. W. Taylor in 1895, J. W. 
Taylor then being County Attorney of McClennan county, to insti- 
tute suit against the Waters-Pierce Oil Company to recover penalties 
for a violation of the anti-trust law, statute of 1889. The charge 
[that he had accepted $1,500 from the Waters-Pierce Oil Company 
through Bailey in June, 1900, and $3,100 from Johnson in Novem- 
ber, 1900] is an infamous one. [Like Curtis Oates, described by 
Macauley as carrying the "highest head in all England" and like 
'Bailey, the bluffer, the witness was crying "persecution."] 

That suit was finally disposed of in the District Court of McClen- 
nan county about the first of November, 1900. My connection with 
that case ceased about the last of October, the 28th of October, 1900. 
There was an attempted settlement made of the case in May or June. 
The first information I had with reference to an effort to settle this 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 445 

case by compromise was through Senator Bailey. On Sunday, the 
last day of April [1900], I received a telegram from Senator Bailey, 
sent from Parson, Kansas, asking me to meet him in Hillsboro on the 
Katy Flyer and ride as far as Waco with him; that he wanted to see 
me. I could not go on account of sickness, so I telephoned Judge 
Nelson Phillips, at Hillsboro, to meet Senator Bailey at the train and 
tell him why I did not come. Of course I did not know what he 
wanted with me. * * * j took it for granted it was political 
matters. That afternoon Mr. Henry came to my house and I told 
him about this telegram and asked him to go to the train that night 
and meet Senator Bailey and explain to him why I could not meet 
him. I was sick myself — nothing serious. The next morning I 
met Senator Bailey and Mr. Henry. He persuaded Senator Bailey 
to get ofif and spend the night there in order that he might talk with 
me the next morning. Senator Bailey, I believe, said that he was 
going to Austin, the next morning. Something was said — he had 
promised Pierce, I believe, to speak to me about compromising this 
case. 

I went into a conference with Mr. Henry and Thomas, [that was 
after Bailey had gone on to Austin and come back again to Waco] 
the County Attorney, and Judge Scott, the District Judge. Henry 
and I finally concluded, with Judge Scott's endorsement, that $10,- 
000 to the State and if Pierce paid our fee, would be a reasonable 
compromise. * * * Thomas at that time wanted to hold out 
for $25,000 but Henry and I first suggested $12,500. * * * 
Thomas thought that the settlement was not proper; it was too small 
and we never could agree on the settlement. 

Senator Bailey left to go to Austin and came back to Waco either 
the 3rd or 4th of May. We only got to the proposition of taking 
$10,000 for the State and paying our fee. That was the first day 
that Senator Bailey was there. 

Senator Bailey said that he had no interest in the matter [he then 
had at least $3,300 of Pierce's gold and his interest in the matter 
seems to have grown into the hundreds of thousands of dollars 
since], except in a friendly way. * * * My recollection is when 
he left there, that I requested him to come back, and to stop off on 
his way back from Austin. 

We recognized the County Attorney's power to fix the amount 
that the suit should be settled for, and while we did not agree with him 
in his views, still we recognized that we had to acquiesce in those 
views. [That is doubtless the reason Stribling retired from the case, 
having sold out to the other side.] 

SAYS BAILEY DID NOT PAY HIM THE $1,500 FOR WHICH BAILEY MADE 
DRAFT ON WATERS-PIERCE, JUNE 13TH, 19OO. 

I never received a five-cent piece from Senator Bailey in my life, 
and that charge filed there, which this Committee is investigating, is 
an infamous lie. [Then what did Bailey do with the $1,500 and 



446 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

what did Johnson mean when he wrote Clark, on the i6th of June, 
1900, that "I have arranged at least for the time being to satisfy 
Henry & Stribling"? If Bailey did not pay Stribling the money, he 
must have misapplied it to his own uses and "satisfied" Stribling 
with "chin talk." or promises of money after the case should be dis- 
missed.] 

I never received any money from the Waters-Pierce Oil Com- 
pany or anyone else in connection with that matter, at that time or 
after that time, not one five-cent piece, either directly or indirectly. 
* * * Senator Bailey never, as I said before, mentioned the liti- 
gation to me after the first of May, except here in Austin at the State 
Convention, he merely asked me if the matter had ever been settled, 
something of that sort. [The State convention to which he refers, 
met in Austin, June 21st, just eight days after Bailey had drawn 
$1,500 from the Waters-Pierce Oil Company with which to "satisfy" 
Stribling's "restlessmess" "for the tim.e being." This is an admis- 
sion from Stribling that Bailey was still interesting himself on behalf 
of his client, the Waters-Pierce Oil Company, and doubtless in pur- 
suance of "the policy agreed upon" between Johnson and Clark.] 

STRIBLING GOES TO ST. LOUIS AND COLLECTS THIRTY-ONE HUNDRED 

DOLLARS. 

I went to St. Louis in November, for the purpose of seeing Mr. 
Johnson on a matter of business, not connected in any way with the 
suits at Waco or any litigation then pending against the Waters- 
Pierce Oil Company and Mr. Johnson paid me $3,100 for services 
to be rendered in the future. [Isn't this too funny.] Had no con- 
nection with this litigation at all. There was an item of expense of 
$100 included in the $3,100. [Leaving the $3,000 that Johnson, 
Pierce and Bailey had proposed to pay to Henry & Stribling in May, 
in consideration of their agreeing to a compromise of the suit. As 
it turned out Bailey seems to have gotten $i,i;oo from Johnson which 
he was supposed to have paid to Stribling and Stribling finally got 
his $3,000 in November and Congressman Henry, be it said to his 
credit, has gotten only an unpleasant deal of notoriety.] 

At tl is point the witness was asked if he had any objection to 
telling what the $3,100 was for. To which he replied, "None at all." 
Mr. Odell immediately arose and objected, saying: "Now Mr. 
Chairman, just a minute, I don't think it should be made a part of this 
record in a case where Senator Bailey is under investigation. We 
make no objection to it, of course, if Mr. Stribling wants to state it." 
Then why was the objection so strenuous and why did he continue 
to object and wrangle for hours, as shown by pages 333-351 of the 
Committee's Report, which finally resulted in a Star Chamber ex- 
ecutive session in order to keep Stribling's testimony out of the news- 
papers and out of the record. Odell, Bailey & Company, however, 
were finally forced to capitulate and Stribling was recalled as a wit- 
ness and required to tell the preposterous, and, it is believed manu- 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 447 

factured, story of Johnson having employed him as a lobbyist be- 
fore the Twenty-Seventh Legislature at a retainer fee, in advance, of 
$3,000. It is believed that this story was simply conjured up in or- 
der to explain away the fact that the Waters-Pierce Oil Company 
had bribed Stribling to keep him "quiet" during the year 1900. 

STRIBLING TESTIMONY CONTINUED. 

(page 334) 

I don't recall whether he [Bailey] said Pierce or Francis re- 
quested him to assist in settling those suits, but I am under the impres- 
sion that he said that he had promised Mr. Pierce that he would 
speak to me about it. My recollection is that Johnson, Pierce and 
Bailey came here on the night train. I think I met Senator Bailey in 
my office. We discussed the matter over, that is, the settlement with 
Pierce. 

I don't think Johnson, Pierce and Bailey stayed at Waco over one 
day. I could not say about their leaving there together, I do not 
know. 

After the first settlement failed. Pierce and Johnson came back to 
Waco. [Friday, June ist, 1900.] 1 understood from their state- 
ment that they had been here to Austin and had a new permit 
issued. * * * I recognized the fact that on account of the cor- 
poration having dissolved, our suit being for a penalty, that it was 
very doubtful if we could prosecute it successfully, and I felt like 
they ought to have settled that penalty suit. I did not feel very good 
over the matter, / did threaten to ptit it in the hands of a receiver. 

I think I was employed by the Waters-Pierce Oil Company about 
the 20th or 2 1 St of November. I have no objection to stating what 
that service was. [But Messrs. Odell, Bailey & Company did ob- 
ject by exclaiming, among many other things: "When is this investi- 
gation to end, and how far is the inquiry to go? * * * Why 
satisfy the curiosity of these gentlemen, why? * * * *Surely 
there ought to be some limit to confine at least the curiosity of these 
gentlemen about a transaction that Senator Bailey is not concerned 
with, and I object to it for that reason." If the inquiry would not 
affect Senator Bailey adversely why did Odell make objection after 
objection simply to curb "the curiosity" of the proponent of the 
charges and his attorneys.] 

At this point in the testimony of Stribling, Judge James H. Rob- 
ertson, then the admittedly retained attorney of H. Clay Pierce in the 
indictment which was pending against him at Austin for false swear- 
ing, and the same Robertson who now turns up as the retained attorney 
of the Security Oil Company, which is being sued by the State of 
Texas as a secret arm of the Standard Oil, said: "I suggest that Mr. 
Stribling step apart with Mr. Crane and impart this information, and 
not become a part of the record, unless it is material." (page 338.) 

Mr. Stribling — Suppose I write you. General, something about it? 
[Note the sly fox-like evasive suggestion of Stribling.] 



448 Senator J. W. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

Mr. Crane — No; / do not care for any private conferences. It is 
perfectly legitimate cross-examination. 

Mr. Odell — The point we make is that Senator Bailey has some 
rights here. He is the man that is being investigated. 

Senator Looney — I do not think it is proper to ask Mr. Stribling 
to discuss his private business. 

Mr. Odell — Now, as I say, whether proper or improper, and as- 
suming it to be proper, is the burden on us here to have a private trans- 
action of Mr. Stribling inquired into. 

Mr. Crane — If I understand this witness, he testified that the 
amount of money he got was $3,100? 

Witness — Yes, sir. 

Mr. Crane — Isn't there a voucher in the record of $3,100? 

Mr. Odell— Certainly. 

Mr. Crane — Didn't Mr. Johnson refuse to disclose what that 
$3,100 was spent for? 

Mr. Odell — Mr. Johnson stated that the $3,100 was a private 
transaction and the Committee, after hearing a full statement from 
him that it was a private transaction and wholly legitimate, with Mr. 
Stribling here, and wholly disconnected — 

Senator Stone — [A Bailey partisan member of the Senate Com- 
mittee] — I would suggest that this Committee go into executive ses- 
sion, and everybody be excluded from the room except the members 
of the Committee, and then we will hear Mr. Stribling. 

Mr. Crane — Does that mean the attorneys get out, too? I protest 
against that. 

Mr. Chairman — I suggest Mr. Crane allowed to be present. 

Senator Looney — I put this matter up to the Committee — 

The Chairman — / am not going to let a sensation grow out of this, 
and I will have an executive session and will see whether it is proper 
testimony or not, and so that no question can arise I will permit the at- 
torneys and Senator Bailey to remain in the house. 

Thereupon the executive session of the Committee was held as 
directed by the Chairman. Upon reconvening in open session the 
examination of Mr. Stribling was resumed, as follows: 

I do not recall any bills particularly that affected the Waters- 
Pierce Oil Company before the Twenty-seventh Legislature in 1901, 
I did not appear before a Committee of that legislature in the interest 
of the Waters-Pierce Oil Company. / did convey information to 
Mr. Johnson in respect to legislation, but I do not remember about 
what bills. [And this is doubtless how the witness, Stribling, earned 
his $3,100. Not by lobbying even; simply by "conveying information 
to Johnson." Then it was, doubtless, that Johnson must have wired 
Pierce in New York, that the Texas Legislature was after the Waters- 
Pierce Oil Company and forthwith Pierce made Bailey the $8,000 
"loan" and Bailey hurried to Austin to do the lobbying himself.] 

I did not conduct any litigation for the Waters-Pierce Oil Com- 
pany during the year of my employment, beginning in November, 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 449 

I9(X), and ending in November, 1901. I decline to answer your ques- 
tion as to whether or not I performed any legal services whatever for 
the Company during that time. * * * The service that I per- 
formed for them was a matter of private business between me and the 
Waters-Pierce Oil Company and I decline to state anything further. 
I have said to you that I did not perform any service for them con- 
nected with any litigation. * * * I decline to answer your ques- 
tion because I do not think it pertinent. 

Mr. Odell — I want to ask this gentleman [Mr. Crane] if he ex- 
pects to prove that Senator Bailey in any way in the world was con- 
nected with this private matter about which he is inquiring and inter- 
rogating this witness? If not, we object to it. 

Mr. Crane — I am asking the witness in connection with the record 
as it is. 

The witness, Stribling — // was entirely a private matter. 

Mr. Wolfe — I object because this is but an indirect method of get- 
ting the very thing that was ruled out in the executive session. 

Mr. Crane — I will take the ruling of the Committee on that prop- 
osition. The roll was called and the ruling of the Chairman, exclud- 
ing the testimony, was sustained by the following vote: To sustain: 
Cobbs, Patton and Wolfe — three. Against sustaining: McGregor 
and Robertson — two. Jenkins, absent. 

The witness: I did not report to anybody else with reference to 
business down here, [Before the Twenty-Seventh Legislature in 
1901] except Mr. Johnson. 

Mr. Crane — Now, for the purpose of getting the matter into the 
record, I wish to ask — and for no other purpose — I presume the Chair 
will rule it out — what was your employment with the Waters-Pierce 
Oil Company during the year, and when did it begin and all about it? 

The Chairman — I overrule the question for the same reason. 

THE COMMITTEE LOSES ITS NERVE AND RECONSIDERS. 
(Bailey Investigating Committee Report, 1907, page 361.) 

After the incidents above described, on the next day Judge Poin- 
dexter concluded, at the instance of the majority of the Senate Com- 
mittee it is thought, which majority was against Bailey just as a ma- 
jority of the House Committee was for him, that the Star Chamber 
Executive proceedings of the previous night were ill advised and im- 
proper, and so expressed himself to the Committee. Thereupon a 
general wrangle ensued in which Odell, Bailey & Company became 
obstreperous and pale-faced, in turns, and as a result of which the 
Committee concluded to recall Mr. Stribling and require of him to 
disclose the nature of his employment by the Waters-Pierce Oil Com- 
pany, in consideration of which the $3, 100 was paid him, immediately 
after the dismissal by Judge Scott of the penalty suit at Waco. 

Mr. Stribling said: 

I was to represent the Waters-Pierce Oil Company in Legislative 
matters that might come up during the session of the Legislature, in 



450 Senator J. JV. Bailey of Texas Uiiinasked 

appearing before Committees on any bill that might affect their inter 
ests, provided that the bill did not involve any matter that was in- 
volved in the litigation at Waco, in which I was attorney for the State. 
In addition to that, I was also to represent the Waters-Pierce Oil 
Company during that year, in any litigation that they might have in 
the Courts of Texas. [What had become of Clark & Bollinger?] 
and for further compensation, if this amount was not sufficient in my 
judgment and Mr. Johnson's, the fee was to be agreed upon as the 
service was performed — this was about the substance of it. 

The money was paid to me by Mr. Johnson. I had no communi- 
cation with any other party connected with the Waters-Pierce Oil 
Company in reference to the matter. Mr. Henry had no connection 
with the matter and knew nothing about it and never got one cent of 
the fee. [Congressman Henry in June, 1900, was attending to his 
duties at Washington. Stribling was in Waco, according to Clark's 
letter to Johnson, on the 5th of June, 1900, "restless and dissatisfied. 
Threatening receivership proceedings and to allege fraud in the re- 
admission of the Waters-Pierce Oil Company" — hence the Waters- 
Pierce Oil Company were interested only in "quieting" Mr. Stribling, 
personally.] I don't know anything about it, of course, / presume 
Senator Bailey had nothing to do with the employment. 

I never received any communications, and I did not want to re- 
ceive any communications, from Mr. Johnson in reference to the mat- 
ter. / preferred a personal interview. 

I was in St. Louis, November 20th or 21st, 1900. The penalty 
suit was disposed of [at Waco] between the first and 6th of Novem- 
ber. I received no telegram at all. Mr. Johnson when he left Waco 
[after the penalty suit was dismissed], after we had this conversation 
that I mentioned — I think something was said at that time about me 
coming to St. Louis or that he would see me when he came back. I 
have given you my reasons for going to St. Louis; it was purely a vol- 
untary act on my part, except what was said between Mr. Johnson 
and myself. 

STRIBLING, LIKE BAILEY, ALSO ASKS FOR AN "EXONERATION." 

I will just say this to the Committee that I feel very much out- 
raged at the charge that has been made against me in such a wanton 
way that it relates — reflects upon my professional integrity, and 1 de- 
sire that record to show that 1 deny in the strongest terms possible, 
having any knowledge of the transaction contained in the charge, with 
reference to the fifteen hundred-dollar voucher, and that I know noth- 
ing about it, and didn't have any connection with it whatever, and 
there were no dealings between myself and |. D. fohnson, or any per- 
son connected with the Waters-Pierce Oil Company or H. C. Pierce, 
that would justify an entry of that sort on their books. I desire, and I 
ask this Committee in this connection, in making your report, if you 
think the testimony justifies, that you expressly exonerate me from 
that charge. It is a pretty serious matter, as I take it, for any person 



The Folilical Lifc-Story of a Fallen Idol 451 

to file a charge of that sort against another one, unless there is absolute 
proof. I think the matter should receive the condemnation that it 
deserves. [Then what became of the $1,500 drawn by his friend 
Bailey with which to "quiet all Texas parties?" Like Bailey, when 
his sin had found him out, he, too, cried "persecution."] 

STRIBLING ON HIS DIGNITY. 
(Page 369.) 

Mr. Cocke — How long have you known Senator Bailey, Mr. 
Stribling? 

A. Am I to answer that? 

The Chairman — Yes, sir, go ahead. 

A. I prefer to answer questions from Mr. Poindexter. 

The Chairman — Well, I will ask you to answer the questions, in 
respect to the Committee. 

A. I will answer 1 have known Senator Bailey since 1882. 

Mr. Cocke — You were young men together, and friends, were you 
not? 

A. We were at college together. 

Mr. Cocke — Is that the first time you met him? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Cocke — At college? 

A. The first time I met him was at Lebanon, Tenn. I was a 
member of the literary department of the Cumberland University, 
and Mr. Bailey was a member of the law department. 

Mr. Cocke — When you said a while ago that Senator Bailey knew 
nothing of your monetary dealings with Mr. Johnson and the Waters- 
Pierce Oil Company, you were not undertaking to say that Mr. John- 
son or Mr. Pierce might not have so advised, are you? 

A. No, sir. 

Mr. Cocke— That's all. 

Q. One more question, Mr. Stribling, did it occur to you as any- 
thing unusual or out of the ordinary, that the Waters-Pierce Oil Com- 
pany should pay an attorney for the services described by you, three 
thousand dollars in advance, Mr. Stribling? 

A. I think it would have been very unusual to have paid some 
attorneys that, hut it didn't occur to me it uvis anythinjs; unusual to pay 
me. [This sounds decidedly Baileyesque. Injured innocence was 
his duplicitous role.] 

Q. Do you know whether they have ever had such an attorney 
[lobbyist] in this State since that employment, and under such em- 
ployment? 

A. No, sir, I do not. 

JUDGE SAM R. SCOTT DESCRIBES HIS CONNECTION WITH THE 
CONTROVERSY. 

Judge Sam R. Scott of Waco, Texas, the District Judge before whom the 
penalty suits and criminal cases were pending at Waco when Bailey interested him- 



452 Senator J. W. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

self therein, in May, 1900, appeared before the Committee February 4th, 1907, and 
testified (Bailey Invest. Com. Report, 1907, pp. 515-536) in part as follows: 

I am Judge of the Fifty-fourth district court; reside at Waco, 
Texas, and have been presiding judge of that district since 1893, in- 
cluding the years 1900, 1901 and 1903. 

Mr. Bailey told me at Waco, May i, 1900, that he told Mr. Pierce 
that if his company was in no wise connected with the Standard Oil 
Company and he was willing to go into the State of Texas and obey 
our laws, that he knew the people of Texas would not require them to 
leave the State; that they had no disposition to drive any legitimate 
enterprise from the State, and he said that all they needed was to be 
assured that they would obey the laws of Texas, and that would be all 
that the people of Texas would want; that Pierce had assured him 
that was his desire and that the trouble he had gotten into was a matter 
that he actually had no knowledge of; that it had been brought about 
by one of his agents, which the head office at St. Louis did not know 
anything about; in fact, he would guarantee that nothing of that kind 
would take place, and that that was the purpose for which he was 
there, to do what he could to assist him in getting his trouble settled. 
That is the conversation I had with him. 

The first time Mr. Bailey was down there, we were in Mr. Henry's 
office, I think about the time that the Senator had made this statement, 
or the substance of it, and Mr. Henry said something — I think Mr. 
Bailey had stated that Mr. Pierce had said that he was the entire 
owner of the Waters-Pierce Oil Company and that in some investiga- 
tion — either congressional or some legislative investigation, I am not 
sure which, I think probably Rockefeller had testified that he owned 
51 per cent. — 

Q. Who owned? 

A. The Standard Oil Company owned 51 per cent, of the stock, 
and Mr. Bailey says, "Can you — have you got that statement?" and 
Henry says, "Yes, I have got it." And he says, "Get it for me." He 
says, "Pierce tells me that is not true, and, if you can show me where 
it is true, I will go in there — " Mr. Pierce was at that time in Judge 
Clark's office, in the same building — "I will simply go in there and 
tell him he has simply lied to me, and I will have nothing further to 
do with him." Henry went in his book case and got out a volume and 
turned to what evidence he referred to and Senator Bailey sat down 
and read it and after he got through reading it he said to Henry, he 
says, "Is this all the testimony you have on that matter?" And he says, 
"Yes, that is what I referred to." "Well," he says, "Bob, this don't 
sustain your position at all, but, on the contrary, it shows the reverse." 
They discussed it at some length and finally Mr. Henry agreed with 
the Senator — that he was correct. So they dismissed the subject on 
that occasion. 

[If the above statement represented the real attitude of Mr. Bai- 
ley at the time, why is it that he has never denounced Pierce, but, on 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 453 

the contrary, has clung to him ever since it has been plain even to our 
blind Joe that Pierce lied about it? Answer: Simply because Joe 
was bluffing all the time and still is.] 

After Mr. Henry and Mr. Stribling severed their connection with 
the penalty suit, they had absolutely no connection whatever with the 
business so far as the court was concerned, at all, and whatever ar- 
rangement he made after that with the Waters-Pierce Oil Company, 
if he wanted to charge them $5,000 and they wanted to pay it, it is a 
matter of agreement between them. [Birds of a feather flock to- 
gether.] 

JUDGE SCOTT A PARTISAN POLITICIAN IN SPITE OF HIS JUDICIAL 
POSITION. 

The witness Scott: At a meeting of Mr. Bailey's friends in Waco, 
after they had ordered the second primarv election [December, 1906], 
they met and decided that I should take charge of the campaign in 
that county and I accepted it with pleasure. Yes, sir; I did introduce 
Mr. Bailey this summer at Marlin; I did that on frequent occasions 
several years ago, and I did it this time, and I would do it tomorrow if 
I got the chance. [As a matter of course.] 

Q. Wasn't it a fact, not then disputed, that the Standard Oil 
Company had an interest in the old Waters-Pierce Oil Company? 

A. Mr. Pierce was disputing it very strenuously at the time. 

Q. Did you know that Mr. Pierce had testified by deposition in 
the case here and by deposition in the case in your court that a part of 
that stock was owned by the Standard Oil Company and by its men? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. You didn't know that? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Did you know that the document filed showing the increase 
of the stock of the old Waters-Pierce Oil Company from $100,000 to 
$400,000 showed that parties connected with the Standard Oil Com- 
pany did own a part of the Waters-Pierce Oil Co.? 

A. No; I did not know that. 

If I had known at the time that Pierce subscribed for the stock of 
the reorganized Waters-Pierce Oil Company under agreement, by 
which the Standard was to superintend and audit that business and 
have him transfer a portion of that stock to somebody named by them 
in the future when they got ready for it, there would have been an en- 
tirely dififerent judgment entered. He assured me that it was not a 
fact. If such is a fact, fraud was practiced by Pierce upon the State 
of Texas and upon me in procuring the abatement of that suit, but to 
which I was in no way a party and had no knowledge of it at all. But 
if those things are true there was fraud practiced on me. That is the 
way I consider it; I think it was a fraud, not by Senator Bailey, but 
by Mr. Pierce. [Bailey was meddling where he had no business. Of 
course he was not practicing law nor influence for pay — he was sim- 
ply getting loans never to be repaid or if repaid at all, to be repaid by 
more influence and more loans.] 



454 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

Mr. Thomas at no time intimated that he would approve of the 
idea that Mr. Pierce was to pay the fees of the attorneys; he doubted 
the propriety of that ; he did not think it was the proper thing for him 
to do. 

Mr. Bailey explained how he happened to be there; that he was 
there for the purpose of enabling and assisting Pierce, if he could, in 
some friendly way, to settle this litigation. 

Q. You did not understand that he was practicing law, did you? 

A. No, no, he stated at the time that they had offered to pay him 
for it, but he told them that he would not accept anything at all, that 
he was simply doing it as a friend. 

Q. Did he say anything about having accepted a loan? 

A. No, sir; no, no. 

Q. If he was not practicing law, he was practicing something 
else, wasn't he? 

A. Yes, sir; I guess so. 

HONORABLE CULLEN F. THOMAS OF WACO TESTIFIES IN 1907. 

Hon. C. F. Thomas of Waco was summoned by the proponent of the charges 
and testified (Bailey Invest. Com. Report, 1907, page 392) in part as follows: [As far 
as possible the points brought out in Mr. Thomas' testimony of 1901, hereinbefore 
reproduced, are omitted here]. 

The first efforts at compromise, so far as I know, were made on 
May 3rd, 1900. The first person who ever mentioned to me a compro- 
mise of the litigation was Senator Bailey. 

I thought it improper for Pierce to pay them [Henry & Stribling] 
a fee of any kind or of any amount. We were acting in a trust capacity 
— we were representatives of the State — we would be in the attitude 
of making a fee, a contract for a fee with ourselves for ourselves, 
which I didn't think was proper. 

I went to the office of Henry & Stribling in what is known as the 
Clark building. In that conference there was Mr. Henry, Mr. Strib- 
ling, Mr. Pierce, Mr. Johnson and myself. [That was May 3rd, 
1900] we had been there about five minutes when Mr. Bailey came 
in or knocked at the door and icas admitted to the room b\ Mr. Strib- 
ling. The litigation was discussed in a general way, back and forth, 
Mr, Pierce reviewing the troubles, protesting his innocence. Mr. 
Baily further said that his sole interest over there was as a citizen of 
Texas; that he did not want to drive out capital, and wanted to make 
corporations obey the laws, and that he would like this litigation — 
would like to see the criminal cases dismissed and would like to see 
the penalty suit adjusted with such amount to the State as would sat- 
isfy its dignity and also a liberal fee paid to Henry & Stribling as 
originators of the litigation. 

PIERCE AND HIS DOG RANCH. 

After a general discussion of the litigation, the history of the 
Waters-Pierce Oil Company and its troubles, we wound up with a 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 455 

very interesting story by Mr. Pierce of how he had invested $8,000 
and lost it in a dog ranch. That was the conclusion of it. 

Mr. Henry had signified his willingness to approve of a compro- 
mise of $10,000 to the State, and $3,000 to his firm. My first reply was 
that "You have broken faith in so doing." Senator Bailey was present 
at the time I left those gentlemen together, and Mr. Henry reported 
that after I left the terms of the compromise had been discussed. I 
told them that they had broken faith. I said, "I am in no position 
to demand more in settlement of these suits than $10,000, when my 
associate counsel have both agreed that $10,000 was all they would 
ask, and the district judge said he would approve that settlement re- 
gardless of the amount, the criminal cases will not be dismissed at all, 
under any circumstances, I cannot be a party to the compromise when 
you gentlemen get $3,000 from Mr. Pierce. You are in a position of 
arguing for a big fee for yourselvees and a small judgment for the 
State, and you are seeking to influence my judgment by tendering me 
your part of our legal fee." They said, "If you think that it is the fee 
that we are after, to show you our disinterestedness as to the fee, dis- 
miss your penalty suit and go on and try your criminal cases." Which 
I flatly refused to do, and said we would fight it out in the courts, 
whatever the result. 

The discussion as to the amount allowed us by law to charge or 
collect as attorneys was 10 per cent., nothing said about a larger per 
cent. 

I did not know Judge Scott was to be there. [At the first confer- 
ence on May 3rd, 1900, — the one held in the morning between the 
attorneys for the State.] I was invited by Mr. Henry to come to his 
room for a conference with Mr. Stribling and found the judge there. 
He took very little part in the conference, I think he left us before we 
had finished. I know he did say as we were attorneys in the case, 
whatever settlement we made he would ratify as judge. 

There was no communication of any kind [after May 3rd, 1900] 
bet^veen myself and anybody as to the litigation, until the first day of 
June thereafter, 1900. I supposed that all the overtures of any kind 
were over. Mr. Stribling notified me that Mr. Pierce and Mr. John- 
son were again in the city for the purpose of seeking to settle their liti- 
gation. He asked me if I was of the same opinion as to settlement, I 
said, "I am ; that time had only confirmed me in the correctness of my 
position; that under no circumstances would I consent to their taking 
a fee from the Waters-Pierce Oil Company and if that was the pur- 
pose, it wouldn't do any good to see Mr. Pierce." Stribling said, "He^ 
would not compromise the case for the ten per cent alloiceJ by law." 

We went then to his office again, the ofiice of Henry & Stribling. 
We found there at that time Mr. Pierce, John D. Johnson, Judge 
Clark and Judge Scott. [That was the conference of Friday, June 1 , 
1900.] Mr. Pierce opened the subject. His first words were in sub- 
stance these: "Mr. Thomas, you seem to be about my only stumbling 
block now in Texas. I have settled matters down at Austin satisfactor- 



456 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

ily." He said he had come back in the hope now of settling his Waco 
troubles, and he said his final proposition was to pay the State a judg- 
ment for $10,000, to pay Henry & Stribling three thousand dollars, 
and that the criminal cases was to be dismissed. I said, "I will say 
that under no circumstances can I accept that settlement for myself 
for the State," and I gave him three reasons. I said, "My first reason 
is that the law fixes our compensation. We are the counsel for the 
State. The State pays us; that per cent, goes to them and myself, 
whatever it may be, and for the attorneys to get $4,000, myself the ten 
per cent, of $10,000, and Henry & Stribling to get $3,000, makes a 
total of $4,000 to the attorneys and $9,000 to the State. Either our 
judgment is four times too small or the fee is four times too big." 

The second reason was that the judgment proposed was too small. 
I knew enough to know that in a suit for $100,000 and more and the 
offense was continuous, one being based on the Standard Oil Agree- 
ment — and that certainly ten per cent, of that amount was a very small 
compromise but I said I would waive that part of it if other matters 
were settled, adjusted for the State, I would accept a compromise of 
$25,000. That amount he declined to pay. Mr. Johnson said that 
they had been to considerable expense in the reorganization, in trans- 
ferring the assets from the old to the new company, and I believe he 
said it had cost them $60,000. [That must have included Joe's $3,300 
and how much more we do not know, as well, perhaps, as the stamps 
and stationery used by the Company in notifying all its employes by 
the same mail that they were discharged by the old Company but re- 
employed by the new.] 

The third reason was that, as a condition to any kind of settlement 
— Mr. Pierce's ultimatum was a dismissal of the criminal case. I de- 
clined that and I gave him my reasons then; * * * that if he was 
guilty here as he proposed to plead guilty in the civil suit and as his 
Company had been found guilty at Austin I could not dismiss the 
criminal case. I told him further that he had been four years a fugi- 
tive from justice and the State had tried to extradite him without suc- 
cess, and he had finally surrendered when this litigation here went 
against him. 

In that connection, Mr. Pierce said that he was surprised that he 
could not settle with the State, because Senator Bailey had assured 
him that the proposition he made would be accepted * * * At 
that time Judge Scott spoke up and said in the conference that he had 
told Senator Bailey that so far as the civil suit was concerned, he 
would ratify the proposed compromise, but that he would not con- 
sent himself to a dismissal of the criminal case. This thirty-five per 
cent, [of which you have heard from Stribling in his testimony] t/wt 
is an invention, that is an aftermath." [Just as the so-called and pre- 
tended employment of Stribling to act as a lobbyist for $3,100 was an 
invention and an aftermath, designed to cover up the fact that it was 
a bribe to Stribling.] When Judge Clark brought in his statute and 
read the provision for twenty-five per cent., there was some discussion, 



I 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 457 

very brief, as to whether or not the new statute would apply to the old 
suit, but only mentioned in a casual way. It is not true — there is not 
a syllable of truth in it — that the contention over the thirty-five per 
cent, had anything whatever to do with the breaking up of the com- 
promise. [That was Stribling's story.] Nor is it true, as has been 
stated, that I broke up the compromise because of a wrangle over the 
fee. There was special reason that the wrangle was over — the taking 
of what I called and yet believe, an illegal fee. The statement that I 
was seeking to take thirty per cent, and give them five per cent, is 
untrue, because I never claimed that the law would give thirty-five 
per cent. I thought there was some doubt whether you would be 
given ten per cent, or twenty-five per cent. 

JUDGE SCOTT DISMISSES PENALTY SUIT. 

The case was set for trial November 3rd, 1900, and a plea in abate- 
ment was filed by A. M. Finlay in which he set up the dissolution of 
the old company and the reorganization of the new company. I filed 
a motion for a continuance. They filed that plea the day the case was 
set for trial, or the day before, I am not certain which. I asked for a 
continuance on the ground that the State proposed to show that the 
new was the same as the old, the property was the same, the stock own- 
ership the same, the agents the same, general property and personnel, 
and so on — all the same. The motion for a continuance was over- 
ruled and the suit was finally dismissed about the middle of Novem- 
ber. Judge Scott said that he would hold the matter in abeyance for 
ten days from the 5th, to give the Waters-Pierce Oil Company an op- 
portunity to settle up its taxes in this State. 

ALL PAPERS DISAPPEAR. 

When Mr. Pierce was making the statement that the Standard 
was a separate concern from the Waters-Pierce Oil Company, when 
Mr. Bailey was present, I called attention to the fact that this conten- 
tion was not true — that it was a subject of general notoriety. Mr. 
Pierce's own testimony before that time and Rockefeller's admission 
before the Congressional Committee; and the depositions on file in 
the case [there at Waco] showed the connection between the two. 

All the papers in both the civil and criminal cases have disap- 
peared. 

Rice's deposition showed first the testimony of John D. Rocke- 
feller before the Senate Committee of the State of New York, that the 
Waters-Pierce Oil Company was a party to the Standard Oil Agree- 
ment. A copy of that agreement was made part of the deposition. 
[Then on file at Waco, when Bailey was there.] 

Rice's deposition also showed the admission made by H. Clay 
Pierce before a congressional committee that the Waters-Pierce Oil 
Company was a member of that trust, and that the Standard Oil Trust 
owned in part the Waters-Pierce Oil Company. That investigation 
was made in 1887-1888. [And the report thereof was part of the con- 



458 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

gressional record before Bailey was elected to Congress.] The deposi- 
tions further showed the statement made by Mr. Pierce and Mr. Arch- 
ibold, I think, that the Waters-Pierce Oil Company had the exclusive 
control of the southwestern territory, including Missouri, Arkansas, 
Indian Territory, Texas, part of Louisiana and Mexico. I remember 
one statement made by Mr. Pierce's depositions, that the Standard 
Oil Company paid fifteen mills a gallon freight rate from St. Louis 
to Houston, and the George Rice concern had to pay fifty-seven mills. 

I had no part whatever in these charges being filed, no conversa- 
tion or consultation with anybody who filed them; never conferred 
with Mr. Cocke in my life beforehand. 

Henry & Stribling quit the case on October 3rd, 1900, on written 
request to them from myself to withdraw from the case. I reviewed 
briefly their efforts to make what I called an improper compromise. 
I felt like they were not loyal to the State of Texas. 

I could not understand why it was that when on the morning of 
May 3rd, Mr. Pierce offered to pay the State $10,000 and to pay them 
$3,000 — why that night they ofifered to dismiss it and let the State lose 
$10,000, or nine, and themselves lose three. 

In the Pacific hotel conference between Mr. Henry, Mr. Strib- 
ling, Judge Scott and myself, when they, that is either Mr. Henry or 
Mr. Stribling, mentioned that the first they had heard of a compro- 
mise brewing was through Judge Clark sometime before, when he 
said that if the attorneys felt like they could dismiss the penalty suit, 
why, as they had done a good deal of work in it, they ought to get 
$1,000 apiece. After they told me that I went to see Judge Clark. I 
expressed myself as to that statement, that proposition, being of course 
a very improper one. I said, "Mr. Stribling tells me that you sug- 
gested to him that if this civil suit could be dismissed, we could get 
$1,000 apiece — I says, I want to know if you said that." "O," he 
said, "Thomas let that pass, — I was just feeling Strib." [From after 
developments it is quite clear that "Strib" felt satisfactory to this per- 
vertor of justice and bribe giver.] 

CONGRESSMAN HENRY EXHIBITS STANDARD OIL TRUST AGREEMENT 
OF 1882 TO BAILEY WITHOUT CONVINCING HIM. 

Congressman R. L. Henry from the Waco District voluntarily came from 
Washington and at his own request was sworn as a witness, and testified (Bailey 
Investigation Committee Report, 1907, pp. 704-726) in part as follows: 

My name is R. L. Henry; my home Waco, Texas. I have been a 
member of Congress for ten years the fourth of the coming March. 

When I was elected to Congress and took my seat, I abandoned 
the practice of law except in some cases that I had to try, that I felt 
personally that I should try. [So also did Bailey abandon the prac- 
tice of law. Indeed, he had already abandoned that before he ran for 
Congress, but he has never abandoned the practice of influence.] 

I was assistant Attorney General in 1893 ^"^ '894, appointed by 
Governor Hogg. In the fall of 1894 either Governor Hogg or At- 



The Political life-Story of a Fallen Idol 459 

torney General Culberson wired me to go from Tyler, Texas, to 
Waco, and look into some anti-trust violations of the law by the Stan- 
dard Oil Trust officials and the Waters-Pierce Oil Company, or its 
officials. My home was then in Texarkana. 1 had not removed to 
Waco. I went to Waco upon receipt of a telegram and went with the 
grand jury from day to day and after being there a number of days, — 
1 do not remember how many — the grand jury decided to indict the 
officials of the Standard Oil Trust — John D. Rockefeller, H. H. Rog- 
ers, Archbold and the others; there were nine of them; and also the 
officials of the Waters-Pierce Oil Company — H. C. Pierce and An- 
drew M. Finley and some others. In January, 1895, I removed my 
residence to Waco, located there, and being conversant with the anti- 
trust statutes to some extent, I had run across a section of the act of 
1888 — I think it was passed under Gov. Ross' administration — au- 
thorizing a suit for penalties against any corporation, firm or indi- 
vidual, who violated the anti-trust law. JMr. J. W. Taylor was the 
county attorney of McLennan county, at that time. I called his at- 
tention to this section of the anti-trust law authorizing penalties at 
the rate of $50 per day for the violation of that statute, and asked him 
if he did not desire to bring suit against them. He said he did, and 
stated that he would turn the matter over to my firm if we wanted to 
bring the suit and we would divide the fees. He entered into an 
agreement — an oral agreement — that the firm of Henry & Stribling 
were to have two-thirds of whatever commission the statutes allowed, 
and Mr. Taylor was to have one-third. I drew the petition myself 
for our firm and filed it sometime in April, 1895. It was for $109,500, 
the penalties at that time accrued amounting to that much, and, of 
course, we asked for $50 a day for each succeeding day that they vio- 
lated the statute, but at that time they amounted to $109,500. We 
brought this suit. We took depositions amounting to hundreds and 
hundreds of pages. We took the depositions of a number of witnesses 
in Texas. We took the depositions of the former Attorney General 
of Ohio, who was then a member of Congress from that State, D. K. 
Watson, and he went into the evidence at great length. He had 
brought a suit against the Standard Oil Company of Ohio and had 
succeeded in the litigation and driven them beyond the limits of the 
State of Ohio, and was very familiar with all of the testimony and all 
of the Standard Oil Trust agreements. He heard the witnesses testify 
and we proved a number of admissions by him. We took the testi- 
mony of George Rice, an independent oil refiner of Ohio. He had 
attended the sessions of the court in this litigation and heard every 
witness testify, practically. He had attended the sessions of an investi- 
gating committee by Congress in 1888, inquiring into the Standard 
Oil Trust operations, and had heard all of the witnesses testify, includ- 
ing Rockefeller, Archbold, H. Clay Pierce and others, and we proved 
admissions by him. We took his daughter's testimony, Mrs. G. C. 
Butts. She had heard a great deal of this testimony. And, to be b-rief, 
the testimony amounted to hundreds of pages and it was on file in the 



460 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

district court there, in Judge Scott's court. I have not seen it for a long 
time, and do not know what has become of it. 

While passing through Waco from Milam to Bell county, April 
29, 1900, during my canvass for Congress, I went out to see Mr. Strib- 
ling, my law partner. He was sick in bed. He handed me a telegram 
from Senator Bailey in which Senator Bailey requested him — it was 
dated Parsons, Kansas, — in which Senator Bailey requested him to 
meet him at Hillsboro and ride down on the train with him as he, 
Senator Bailey, wanted to talk to him, Stribling, and Mr. Stribling 
asked me to meet Senator Bailey. I went to the train, the M. K. & T. 
Flyer, and did see Senator Bailey. That was the night of the 29th of 
April, 1900. I do not think I can be mistaken about the date, but it 
was Sunday night, at any rate. Senator Bailey stated to me that he 
was going on to Austin on some political matters. [Observe that Mr. 
Bailey was very careful on that trip to always try to impress upon his 
auditors that he had returned, being then absent from his public 
duties while Congress was in session, upon political matters. He was 
equally careful to say nothing of the $3,300 that he had borrowed ( ?) 
from Pierce, insolvent stranger that he was, the first time they ever 
met.] 

Mr. Bailey said he was going on down to Austin. I said, "Well, 
we can not talk any now. You get ofif and stay all night with me." I 
induced him to get ofif and he went with me to the Pacific hotel, where 
I had a room, and I think they gave Senator Bailey an adjoining room 
to me. I remember very well where the rooms were located. That 
was on April 29th. Either that night or the next morning Senator 
Bailey said that Governor Francis had stated to him that Mr. Pierce 
was in trouble down here about his company — H. Clay Pierce — and 
that he would like for Senator Bailey to see if he could do anythmg 
for Pierce while he was here on this other mission. I knew the rela- 
tionship between Bailey and Francis and Senator Bailey stated that 
he was doing this solely as an act of friendship for Governor Francis; 
that Francis had asked him to do it and he would do it for Francis 
just like he would for any other friend. In that conversation Senator 
Bailey stated that Pierce wanted to throw up his hands and "salute 
the laws of Texas." He used that expression. He wanted to abide 
by the decisions of the courts, and conform the conduct of his company 
to the Texas laws and Senator Bailey said that Pierce would be will- 
ing to settle the penalty suit, to compromise it and asked me if we were 
willing to compromise it. I said, "Certainly; we are willing to com- 
promise it if we can arrive at a satisfactory agreement. I would be 
willing to settle any law suit if I could settle it on proper terms." 
Well, Senator Bailey said he was glad to hear that, but I said, "Be 
fore we talk any about it, I want to invite the district judge, Sam Scott, 
before whom the case is pending, and the county attorney, Mr. 
Thomas into a conference, and I do not want to say anything about 
this law suit except in their presence. It is a public law suit and 1 
think they ought to hear everything that is said about it." Mr. Thomas 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 461 

had no connection with the case, really. He had not read the plead- 
ings nor the evidence, and knew absolutely nothing about it, but he 
was county attorney. On the morning of April 30th I went to the 
court house and told Judge Scott what I wanted and told Mr. Thomas 
what I wanted ; that Senator Bailey had stated that Pierce was willing 
to settle this case and to settle it right, and I said, "I am not willing to 
take any part in this except in the presence of the district judge and 
the county attorney, and I want you to come to my room, or wherever 
you say, and we will talk it over." Both of these gentlemen came with 
me. We went to my room at the Pacific hotel and Mr. Stribling was 
there then. He was able to get out of bed and come down. We did 
talk it over and I said, "Whatever judgment agreed upon must be 
signed by the attorneys on both sides. Whatever fee is agreed on 
must be written in the judgment, and this being a public law suit, when 
that judgment is agreed on it must be given to the press so that every- 
body will know just e.\actly what has been going on." They said 
that was right. We talked about it a good deal and we found that 
Pierce was willing to pay as much as $13,000 to the State or he was 
willing to pay $10,000 to the State and $3,000 to the firm of Henry & 
Stribling. 

Q. Now you have gone to the second conference, have you not? 

A. No; that is in the first conference. It occurred in the first 
conference, April 30th. Now, there was a second conference on May 
3rd. Senator Bailey came to Austin. At that time I should state that 
Pierce and Johnson, as I understood it, were not in Waco but had 
come on to Austin. Senator Bailey came on to Austin. He stayed 
here a day or two and he returned to Waco and we had another con- 
ference on May 3rd, in the office of Henry & Stribling — quite a 
lengthy conference — and again I went and got the district judge and 
the county attroney so that they might hear everything that was said, 
and we talked it over before them. Pierce was there. Johnson was not 
there. Clark was not in the conference. Senator Bailey was there a 
good deal of the time, — I do not just know how much of the time, but 
he was there and talked about it. We discussed the terms for a good 
while. At first I had thought that $12,500 for the State and $3,000 
for Henry & Stribling ought to be given, but Judge Scott spoke up 
and said, "No, gentlemen; you know I have tried the Hathway case 
and know all the facts as well as any of you, and if Pierce will give 
$10,000 and $3,000 to the firm of Henry & Stribling that will be a 
good settlement for the State and I will approve of it." [Observe 
that Judge Scott argued with Henry against Henry's $12,500 propo- 
sition in favor of Pierce's $10,000 proposition. The books of the 
Waters-Pierce Oil Company (See Hutchinson's testimony) showed 
that Johnson distributed $2,067 ^^ ^he Waters-Pierce Oil Company's 
money in Texas, March i to June i, of 1901. This was entirely 
apart apparently, and in addition to what Bailey procured for him- 
self, ostensibly for Stribling. As to whom or for what purpose John- 
son distributed that $2,067 the record is silent.] 



462 Senator J. W. Bailey of Texas Unimsked 

The witness, Henry (continuing) — Now after that, after the case 
could not be settled that way, I went back to Washington and was 
there during the first week of June, I think. I think I just did get 
back and Congress adjourned — it adjourned on June 7th, 1900. 

HENRY & STRIBLING WITHDRAW FROM WACO PENALTY SUITS AS AT- 
TORNEYS FOR THE STATE OF TEXAS. 

On October 25, 1900, Mr. Thomas sent this letter to our firm, 
which I will ask to be made a part of the record, and which if you have 
a clerk I would like for him to read. 

The letter referred to was thereupon read, and is as follows: 

"Office of Cullen F. Thomas, County Attorney. 

"Waco, Texas, October 25, 1900. 
"Messrs. Henry £5* Stribl'tng, Waco, Texas. 

"Gentlemen: In the case of the State versus the Waters-Pierce Oil Com- 
pany, we have differed so widely that we are unable to work together in harmony 
in its management and trial. Without desiring now to reopen those differences, you 
know now fully my views as to the impropriety of your offer to take a fee from the 
defendant in the attempted compromise. Again, the position taken by you pending the 
negotiations and afterward reiterated by you in the public press, that the State could 
not, should not, and would not recover m.ore than $10,000, would seem necessarily 
to hamper your usefulness, if not to handicap your efforts in a suit to recover more 
than $10,000; and thus win a judgment now that would condemn your course then. 
For these reasons, and because of our strained personal relations, that may prejudice 
the State's interest in the coming trial, I desire to suggest and request that you gentle- 
men retire from further participation in the case. I feel that it is my right and duty 
as county attorney as it is my intention to conduct the trial. 

As there has been some controversy as to your contract, while adhering to my 
understanding thereof, and waiving no rights thereunder, that there may be no un- 
seemly wrangle on that account, and doing what I believe is the best for the State, 
should you retire I will concede your full claim under the contract and yield to you 
two-thirds of whatever fee (twenty-five per cent, or ten per cent., according to the 
construction) we may be entitled to under any recovery had. 

I hope that you will now voluntarily withdraw. Please favor me with an 
early reply. 

Yours respectfully, 
(Signed.) Cullen F. Thomas. 

We declined to try the case with Thomas. He appeared on the 
morning the case was set for trial, which was some time about the 
first of November, probably the 30th of October, and after he ap- 
peared and undertook to take charge of the case, we filed this paper 
— presented it to the court and filed it: 

"Having been notified by the county attorney that he now proposes for the first 
time to appear and take control of this case, and recognizing his official power to 
come into the case and participate in the trial, and our personal relations to the county 
attorney being exceedingly unpleasant and disagreeable, and being desirous of avoid- 
ing anything that might embarrass the progress of the litigation for the State, we 
respectfully withdraw from the case." 

(Signed.) Henry & Stribling." 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 463 

I desire to state that I never received in any sort of way from the 
Waters-Pierce Oil Company, H. C. Pierce, or any of its agents, rep- 
resentativees, attorneys, or any one else, any sum of money, or any- 
thing of value, at any time. [It seems that Joe and Oscar were the 
beneficiaries of the bounties bestowed by the munificent generosity of 
"My dear Pierce."] 

GEORGE CLARK, TOO, CRIES "FORGERIES." 

Mr. Henry (continuing) — There was two letters used in the Con- 
gressional campaign in 1902 in Falls county — a letter addressed by 
J. D. Johnson to Messrs. Clark & Bolinger, in which there was some 
expressions like: "I have arranged for the time being to settle with 
Henry & Stribling. This is strictly confidential." I have no idea 
what Mr. Johnson meant by that * * * I immediately went to 
Waco and asked Judge Clark about it and he gave me this letter and 
statement about it which I will ask to be made a part of the record : 

"Waco, Texas, June 6, 1902. 
"Hon. R. L. Henry, fVaco, Texas: 

"Dear Sir: In reply to your inquiries of this date as to the genuineness of certain 
letters from Jno. D. Johnson, Esq., of St. Louis, to our firm or to me individually, 
exhibited and read by County Attorney Thomas at Mooreville on yesterday, I have 
to say that in the absence of the letters themselves my opinion is that they are forger- 
ies. I have no recollection of any such correspondence ; or do I remember to have ever 
heard of or known of any arrangements between Mr. Johnson and the firm of 
Henry & Stribling about any matters concerning the Waters-Pierce Oil Co. litigation 
here during their connection with the said litigation. 

If these letters paraded by Mr. Thomas are forgeries, as I believe them to be, 
the offense of using them is a serious one. If they are genuine, they are the property 
of Clark & Bolinger, and they have been stolen from Clark & Bolinger by a thief. 
County Attorney Thomas knows they have been stolen and has received and appro- 
priated them to his own use knowing the same to have been stolen. Further comment 
is unnecessary, as either alternative involves disgrace and criminality. 

(Signed.) Geo. Clark." 

[From the foregoing letter it will be seen that George Clark delib- 
erately denied in 1902 the fact and the substance of his correspond- 
ence with Johnson, which both, he and Johnson, were forced to admit 
as genuine in their testimony before the Committee in 1907. So much 
for George Clark, the corporation opponent and life-long political 
enemy of the late lamented James Stephen Hogg.] 

JOHNSON LIKEWISE PROTESTED INNOCENCE. 

Mr. Henry (continuing) — 

I called for unqualified denial from Johnson. Then I received 
this letter from Johnson: 

St. Louis, Mo., August 18, 1902. 
"Hon. R. L. Henry, fVaco, Texas: 

"Dear Sir: Replying to your letter of the 14th inst., which was not received 
until today, I wish to say that I have neither directly or indirectly, paid nor offered 
or agreed to pay you or your firm any money or other consideration whatever in con- 
nection with the Waters-Pierce Oil Company litigation at Waco or elsewhere; that 



464 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

I do not recall ever having talked with you on the subject of that litigation except 
on one occasion at Waco, when both Judge Scott and Mr. Thomas, as well as others, 
were present and participating. If Mr. Thomas has made charges against you con- 
trary to the foregoing, then it is without foundation. 

Very respectfully, 

J. D. Johnson." 

[A close reading of the above letter discloses the fact that John- 
son did not deny having paid Stribling, his denial only applying to 
"you or your firm." In other words, he did not pay Mr. Henry any- 
thing and did not pay the firm of Henry & Stribling, but does not 
deny having paid Stribling individually.] 

HENRY, STRIBLING & BAILEY MEET AT AUSTIN STATE CONVENTION, 
JUNE l6, 1900. 

Mr. Henry (continuing) — I attended the convention held in 
Waco that year, [August 8th, 1900.] as well as the one held in Austin 
about the middle of June — probably the i6th of June. I came right 
on from Washington after the 7th of June and stayed at home a few 
days and then came down here, [to Austin.] 

Yes, Mr. Stribling was here. I do not know what time Senator 
Bailey left Washington but I think it was shortly after Congress ad- 
journed. He was at the State convention here. [Having come 
through St. Louis where he doubtless arranged the Stribling 
loan of $1,500 and having come on to Gainesville he drew the famous 
$1,500 draft on Pierce, June 13, 1900.] 

I remember his making a speech at the State convention at Austin. 

bailey's name NOT DISCLOSED IN THOMAS-HENRY CONGRESSIONAL 
FIGHT IN 1902. 

Mr. Henry (continuing) — I do not think his (Bailey's) name was 
mentioned in those letters. They were printed in the newspapers at 
the time. No, Mr. Bailey's name was not mentioned in the discus- 
sion. I had understood they had three letters but only two were used, 
and Senator Bailey's name was not mentioned, as I remember it. 

HENRY MEETS BAILEY AT WACO DEPOT. 

It was about 12 o'clock at night when I went to the depot. [In 
Waco, April 29, 1900.] I saw Senator Bailey as he stepped off the 
sleeper coming from the North on the M. K. & T. road. I was wait- 
ing there to meet him because Mr. Stribling was sick in bed and had 
asked me to meet him. 

Q. You are familiar with the train schedules out of Waco and 
into Austin at that time? 

A. Well, some of them I am. 

Q. If Mr. Bailey had continued on that night, the night of April 
29th, to Austin via the M. K. & T. — around by Elgin, isn't it? 

A. Yes. 

Q. What time would he have reached here? 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 465 

A. He would have reached here about daylight the next morn- 
ing. 

Q. Would that have been the logical and ordinary course of 
travel from Waco? 

A. Well, there was a sleeper that ran through over the Katy by 
Elgin and over the Central into Austin. 

[This is the route that Bailey would naturally have taken but, as 
shown by Hon. Phil Clemens, he apparently changed over from the 
M. K. & T. to the I. & G. N. at Taylor without rhyme or reason unless 
it was to avoid the appearance of having come in over the M. K. & T. 
& Central — Mr. Pierce's private car being found the morning of May 
I, 1900, in the yards of the H. & T. C] 

The road from Granger over to Austin had not then been con- 
structed and he would probably have changed cars at Taylor and 
taken the I. & G. N. or could have gone to Elgin and come up the 
Central Railroad. 

Q. Could have gone to Elgin and came up the Central? 

A. Yes, sir; you could make connections both ways. I expect 
you probably had to wait a little longer at Taylor and a great many 
went to Elgin and went up on the Central. That was one of our best 
routes from Waco here. 

Q. A better route than the other? 

A. Yes, sir; because you did not have to wait as long at Elgin as 
you did at Taylor. 

BAILEY APPROACHES HENRY ON BEHALF OF THE OIL TRUST. 

Mr. Henry (continuing, p. 716) — He [Bailey] made his state- 
ment that Pierce was willing — 

Q. He is the first man that approached you on the question of a 
compromise? 

A. He is; yes, sir. 

Q. Do you remember his saying in one of those conferences that 
he hoped that you gentlemen would not mulct the company or would 
not be harder on Mr. Pierce than possible? 

A. I do not remember any such language as that. I remember 
that he was very strong in his statement that Pierce was willing to 
make a reasonable compromise and he hoped we would do the best we 
could. He said that. 

Q. Were he and Mr. Stribling life-time friends? 

A. Well, they had been at the law school at Lebanon together 
and I think had been friends for twenty-odd years. 

Governor Francis was in Washington a great deal. I do not re- 
member who introduced him to me, but he was around there a great 
deal and I talked to him frequently and I became well acquainted 
with him and had heard him speak of Senator Bailey and had heard 
Senator Bailey speak of Governor Francis, and I had seen them to- 
gether socially, chatting. 

Q. Did you see the telegram from Parsons, Kansas, from Mr. 
Bailey to Mr. Stribling? 



466 Senator J. JV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

A. Yes, sir; my recollection is that I did. He handed me the tel- 
egram and stated he had phoned Nelson Phillips of Hillsboro, who 
was Tom Smith's partner, that he could not come. That was before I 
got in from Limestone county. I got in at 4 o'clock Sunday after- 
noon and he stated he had phoned Nelson Phillips to see Bailey and 
find what he wanted. 

Q. Nelson Phillips was an ex-partner of Tom Smith, then At- 
torney General? 

A. Yes, sir, Nelson Phillips was an ex-partner? 

HENRY KNEW AND ADVISED BAILEY THAT WATERS-PIERCE WAS A MEM- 
BER OF THE STANDARD OIL TRUST. 

Mr. Henry (continuing, p. 717) — 

Q. Did Mr. Bailey make any inquiry as to your researches with 
reference to the connection between the VVaters-Pierce Oil Company 
and the Standard Oil at that time? 

A. I do not think he did. I do not know that I stated it even. 

Q. You then had on file these voluminous depositions from At- 
torney General Watson of Ohio and Mr. Rice? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q, Those depositions established pretty conclusively that con- 
nection, did they not? 

A. Well, I do not think there was the slightest doubt about it. 

Q. Did you argue the connection with Mr. Bailey at any time 
during either of these conferences? 

A. I stated the connection as I believed. 

Q. Gave it as your belief that there was a connection? 

A. I did. 

Q. Did he argue the points with you? 

A. He said this — he said that Francis had told him he could be- 
lieve Pierce; that Pierce stated that his company was not connected 
with the Standard Oil Trust. I stated that I thought it was. 

Q. And still thought so at that time? 

A. Still thought so at that time and think so now. I think the 
testimony showed beyond the peradventure of a doubt that the Waters- 
Pierce Oil Company was a constituent part of the Standard Oil Trust. 
If I had not thought so I would not have brought suit. I wrote the 
indictments, I interrogated all the witnesses, brought witnesses from 
St. Louis, Ohio, and all around, and it showed beyond any sort of 
controversy that the Waters-Pierce Oil Company was a member of the 
Standard Oil Trust. 

HENRY SHOWS BAILEY STANDARD OIL TRUST AGREEMENT. 

I got a copy of the original Standard Oil Trust agreement of 1882 
and a supplement to it and I said to Senator Bailey, "This agreement 
itself shows the connection between the Standard Oil Trust and the 
Waters-Pierce Oil Company," and he took issue with me. He said, 
"Let me read it." I do not think he had ever seen that agreement be- 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 467 

fore. I think that he remarked that he had not. He read it and said, 
"This is divided into three classes; first, a number of corporations 
which have gone boldly into the Standard Oil Trust, and another 
class of private individuals who have gone into the Standard Oil Trust 
— that would be two classes — and third, a part of the stockholders of 
the following corporations entered into the Standard Oil Trust 
agreement and among them under the heading 'a part of the stock- 
holders of the following companies' was the Waters-Pierce Oil Com- 
pany, meaning a part of their stockholders had took stock in the Orig- 
inal Standard Oil Trust." Now, I suppose you are familiar with that 
agreement and the way it was drawn up and their method. They 
took a number of corporations, a number of limited partnerships and 
a number of stockholders, and they formed what they called the Stan- 
dard Oil Agreement. The agreement was written by the eminent 
lawyer who died the other day, S. C. T. Dodd. He was the attorney 
of the Standard Oil Company of Ohio at that time and they were the 
ones who originated this trust. All of these companies when they 
entered the trust, surrendered their stock in all the companies — I mean 
those who went in as a whole — and those who went in as a part put 
their stock in, and then the Standard Oil trustees, nine of them, issued 
certificates of the Standard Oil Trust to these people, and my conten- 
tion was that a part of the Waters-Pierce Oil Company stockholders 
had gone into the original agreement, which was shown on the face 
of it, and that trust certificates were issued to them. 

Q. You gave it to him as your conclusion, after an investigation 
of the facts, did you, that there was a connection? 

A. I said, "We think so. We think we can maintain this suit." 
That was the reason I was so anxious for them to settle, after we 
thought our ease had died. We wanted to get something out of it for 
all that work we had done, in a legitimate way, of course. 

HENRY KNEW NOTHING OF STRIBLIXG'S MONETARY DEALINGS WITH 
WATERS- PIERCE. 

Mr. Henry (continuing) — 

Q. Did you know anything of Mr. Stribling having made a trip 
to St. Louis in November following your withdrawal from the case? 

A. I did not. 

Q. You did not at that time? 

A. I did not at that time, I will tell you why I say it. Immedi- 
ately after I withdrew from the case my little girl was stricken with 
diphtheria and I was confined and quarantined at my home for prob- 
ably all of the month of November. The doctor would not allow me 
to go outside of the gate. People were very much excited. There had 
been several fatal cases there. I remained indoors during the whole 
month almost of November, and just as soon as the doctor said that I 
could go to Washington City to attend the short session of Congress, 
I went from my residence to the train without going down in town 
and went on to Washington and Mr. Stribling said nothing to me 
about the trip to St. Louis. 



468 Senator J. \V. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

Q. When did you learn of Mr. Stribling having received the 
$3,100? 

A. When he made his statement here. 

Q. That was the first you ever knew of it? 

A. Yes, sir. He may have said to me in a general way that he 
had some professional employment with them, but he did not go into 
details about it. It was a matter of his professional employment and 
I knew absolutely nothing about it and had nothing to do with it; 
never got one cent of the fee, and the first knowledge I had of it was 
his statement here. 

ATTORNEY GENERAL CROW OF MISSOURI DENIED THE LEGALITY OF SO- 
CALLED WATERS-PIERCE DISSOLUTION IN 1900. 

Mr. Henry (continuing, p. 722) — He [Attorney General Smith] 
had gone to Jefiferson City to see Attorney General E. C. Crow about 
the dissolution of the Company. [In the summer of 1900 after it had 
gotten back into Texas] whether it was legal or not, had made a spe- 
cial trip there, and Crow, who was the Attorney General of Missouri, 
did not believe that the statute of Missouri had been complied with 
and we [Henry & Stribling] did not think so. Tom Smith thought 
so, but we did not agree with him. 

BAILEY DID NOT INSPECT DEPOSITIONS THEN ON FILE. 

Q. Where were the depositions in the case at the time? 

A. They were in the district clerk's office. 

Q. The depositions were then on file? 

A. Yes, they were on file. Any one could have gone and seen 
them, you understand. There was no trouble about that, but ordinar- 
ily no curious person would be looking around to read a thousand 
pages of depositions in a case like that. [These depositions afterwards 
mysteriously disappeared and as they conclusively proved to Mr. 
Henry's mind the connection between the Waters-Pierce and 
Standard Oil Company, they seem to have been abstracted or 
withdrawn from the office of the district clerk at Waco and thus got- 
ten out of public view. Perhaps George Clark stored them away in 
furtherance of their general scheme to cover up the fact that the Wa- 
ters-Pierce was the southwestern branch of Standard Oil.] 

If it had not been for that plea in abatement, if the company had 
not been dissolved in Missouri, I believe we could have shown that 
we were entitled to recover the whole amount, and I never did doubt 
that for a single instant. 

Re-examination by Mr. Cocke: 

Question — ^Judge Scott did in fact refuse to continue the case upon 
the application of Mr. Thomas, did he not? 

Answer — I think so; I think he refused. 

Q. Did Mr. Bailey say anything to you at that time about having 
just borrowed $3,300 from Mr. Pierce, or any sum of money? 

A. He did not. 



The Political Life-Story of a fallen Idol 469 

Q. Did he say anything to you about Mr. Francis having agreed 
to assist him in buying the Gibbs ranch property in Dallas county? 

A. Well, no; not then. I think after all these matters were 
printed in the papers we talked about those things several times, but 
I do not remember just when nor what was said. 

Q. Nothing was said then? 

A. No. 

Q. You did not know of his obligation to either of those parties? 

A. No. 

Q. Mr. Bailey did not tell you at that time of having borrowed 
$8,000 from Pierce just before he came to Texas? 

A. No, sir. 

BAILEY AND HIS LAWYERS REFUSE TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS. 

On pages 727 and 728 (Bailey Invest. Com. Report, 1907), will 
be found the following proceedings: 

Mr. Cocke presented the following notice to produce, towit: 

"The State of Texas, 
County of Travis. 

Senatorial investigation of J. W. Bailey, pending before the Investigating Com- 
mittee of both the House of Representatives and the Senate, Thirtieth Te.xas Legis- 
lature. 

To J. IV. Bailey, or Messrs. Odell, Hanger, and Jones, his attorneys of record, 

Austin Texas: 

You are hereby given notice to produce a receipt for thirt>'-three hundred dol- 
lars ($3300) dated St. Louis, Missouri, April 25, 1900, executed by J. W. Bailey to 
H. C. Pierce of the Waters-Pierce Oil Co. 

Also sight draft for fifteen hundred dollars ($1500) dated Gainesville, Texas, 
June 13, 1900, drawn by J. W. Bailey on H. C. Pierce or the Waters-Pierce Oil 
Company in favor of parties unknown to complainant. 

Also all letters, telegrams and correspondence received by J. W. Bailey during 
the years 1900 and 1901, as well as since that time from H. C. Pierce, J. D. Johnson, 
A. M. Finlay, D. R. Francis, Geo. Clark, Clark & Bolinger, O. L. Stribling, R. L 
Henry, Henry & Stribling, Geo. Armstead, the latter of Dallas, Texas, or either 
of them in any wise affecting or appertaining to the relations existing between them 
and the said J. W. Bailey, or either of them individually, or between either of them and 
the said J. W. Bailey and the Waters-Pierce Oil Company, or between either of them 
and the said J. W. Bailey and the political situation in Texas in 1900 and 1901, or 
the readmission, litigation or legislation affecting the Waters-Pierce Oil Company, 
or the Standard Oil Company, since, and including the year 1899 to the present time. 

Also all letters, telegrams and correspondence received by the said J. W. Bailey 
from H. C. Pierce, John H. Kirby, B. F. Yoakum, James Campbell, Pat Calhoun, or 
the Kirby Lumber Company from and after the year 1901 to the present time. 

Also all letters, telegrams and correspondence from H. C. Pierce, Van 

Blarcom, The Tennessee Construction Company, The Tennessee Railway Company, 
its bond-holders or creditors or either of them, as well as from the Railroad com- 
pany, or the officials thereof, to whom said Bailey sold or leased the Tennessee Central 
Railway Company and its properties. 

Also all letters, telegrams and correspondence received by the said J. W. Bailey 
from H. C. Pierce, John H. Kirby, The Kirby Lumber Comapny, The Southwestern 
Oil Company, The Houston Oil Company, The Waters-Pierce Oil Company, or 
J. D. Johnson, Andrews, Ball & Streetman, or either of them affecting the South- 
western Oil Company in any manner whatsoever. 



470 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

Also all telegrams, letters and correspondence received by the said J. W. Bailey, 
or his attorneys, or either of them, since the first of January, 1907, from H. C. 
Pierce, J. D. Johnson, A. M. Finlay, George Clark, O. L. Stribling, regarding the 
re-election or investigation of the said J. W. Bailey, in any manner whatsoever. 

Wm. a. Cocke. 
Informant and Member of the House, 
Thirtieth Legislature of Texas." 

Mr. Cocke — Mr. Chairman, I suppose the constitutional right of 
the people to peacefully assemble and petition their representatives is 
still recognized in this country and before this tribunal and inasmuch 
as some twenty-eight citizens of Mt. Calm, in Hill county, have for- 
warded me a resolution adopted at a public meeting and asked me es- 
pecially to present it to the Committee in open session, out of defer- 
ence to that request I present the same and ask that the clerk read it to 
the Committee. 

The petition was submitted to members of the Committee and op- 
posing counsel for inspection. 

Mr. Hanger — We object to it being read. It has got nothing to 
do with this investigation. It is an insult to this Committee that has 
absolutely no place here and is not true. 

The Chairman — I do not think that has got any bearing on this 
thing, and if it did have I think it would be wrong for outsiders to 
petition this committee to do anything. I do not think we are con- 
cerned with it. 

Mr. Cocke — I want to be understood as merely presenting it out 
of deference to the request of the people who sent it, and who believe 
and I believe have a constitutional right to be heard by their repre- 
sentatives under the circumstances. 

HONORABLE D. H. HARDY, SECRETARY OF THE STATE OF TEXAS IN 19OO, 

TESTIFIES. 

Hon. D. H. Hardy, who was secretary of State in 1900, at the time 
the so-called dissolution, reorganization and re-entry into Texas took 
place, testified (Bailey Investigation Committee Report, 1907, pages 
373-379) in part as follows: 

He [Bailey] was in Austin about the latter part of April or first 
part of May. He simply came into the department and had a conver- 
sation with me and in the conversation he asked about what was the 
temperament or disposition of tfie administration and my disposition 
with reference to permitting the Waters-Pierce Oil Company to come 
back into Texas and do business here on condition that they would give 
substantial assurance of complying with the laws of the State. [It 
will be noted from this that Mr. Bailey did not ask about the legal 
status of the relationship between the State and this outlawed trust, 
but was seeking to know "the temperament or disposition of the ad- 
ministration," thus clearly indicating that it was not legal talent he 
was exerting for them but personal and political influence.] 

I do not believe that the question of the relationship [between the 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 471 

Standard Oil and Waters-Pierce Oil Company] was expressly stated. 
It necessarily must have had reference to the fact or supposition that 
there was some relation between them, but I am quite confident that 
nothing was said about the Standard Oil Company in words. 

I told him [the Attorney General] "I pass it up to you. It is for 
you to say. My opinion is the permit will have to be issued. The pa- 
pers are all regular." [But the facts now appear to have been very 
irregular.] The papers showed that Mr. Pierce had subscribed for 
the whole 4,000 shares except four of them. Then I went back to Mr. 
Pierce [who with Clark and Johnson was waiting in the office of the 
Secretary of State] and I said : "Now, Mr. Pierce, we know all about 
this old Company and we know the Standard Oil Company did have 
a whole lot of stock in that," but Mr. Pierce sat right there and as- 
severated to me for one-half hour that he had taken up everything ; that 
the Standard Oil Company had nothing to do with it, and no other 
corporation had anything to do with it, and he and those men were 
the owners of all that stock in good faith. He claimed that he owned 
those 3,996 shares of the stock in his own name and not as agent for 
anybody and that his holdings were bona fide; that was his statement; 
he not only claimed that, but claimed every dollar's worth of stock, 
that ever had been owned by the parties which formerly constituted 
the old Waters-Pierce Oil Company, had been taken over by him and 
the Standard Oil Company and any other company had no interest in 
it whatever. So I said to him, "Mr. Pierce, that is all right, you will 
have to subscribe to the anti-trust affidavit." He says, "/ wilido it 
cheerfully." [So he was not only a ready but a "cheerful" liar.] 

Yes, Mr. Johnson was present when these statements were made. 
I will say, by mannerisms and demeanor, that he was assenting. Cer- 
tainly, he and Judge Clark both created the impression, upon my 
mind, that they themselves both understood the fact that Mr. Pierce's 
statement there was true, that they knew enough about it to know it 
was true. I did ask him [Pierce] questions with respect to the stock- 
ownership of the Company and am absolutely positive that those ques- 
tions were direct as to whether or not the Standard Oil Company was 
in fact interested and part proprietor of the Waters-Pierce Oil Com- 
pany. 

I know from statements to me by Attorney General Smith that he 
and Mr. Bailey were close personal and lifelong friends. My im- 
pression is that Mr. Smith was a Mississippian. I do not know 
whether or not they were at college together. 

I relied conclusively in the matter of issuing the new permit or 
the permit to the new Company upon Attorney General Smith's 
opinion about the matter and my own. We must have recognized 
the fact that whenever a proposition came up to the Department and 
was turned down, that the jurisdiction was directly in the Supreme 
Court to mandamus me if the person I turned down thought I was 
wrong about it. I had been mandamused several times while I was 
in office, and generally the Supreme Court did not turn me down, 



472 Si'}iator J. \V. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

but one time it turned me down. // / had refused them a permit they 
would have had a judicial remedy; they could have filed their peti- 
tion for a mandamus before the Supreme Court. 

Q. You knew who they were. Of course, you knew they were 
an ousted corporation and Mr. Pierce was under indictment, didn't 
you? 

A. Well, Mr. Pierce at that time — I do not remember whether 
I knew he was under indictment or not. [If Mr. Bailey and Attor- 
ney General Smith had recommended to Secretary of State Hardy 
that he refuse the permit and require this outlawed corporation to 
go before the Supreme Court of Texas upon a judicial hearing of the 
law and the facts involved in their alleged right to do business in 
Texas, the story of this senatorial controversy and shame would have 
never been written. In that event, whatever the decision of the Su- 
preme Court, the responsibility for conclusions reached would not 
have involved Mr. Bailey's personal and political influence, at least 
in this case.] 

Mr. Smith afterwards told me, when the political controversy 
came up and the matter got into politics, about having talked with 
Senator Bailey. I undertake to express no opinion as to whether or 
not there was fraud behind the certificate of dissolution which was 
presented to me under the seal of the State of Missouri. 

The amendment of the charter of the old Waters-Pierce Oil Com- 
pany [which amendments were on file in the Attorney General's 
office] showed that the Standard Oil Company through such parties 
— I have forgotten the names now — owned stock in that corporation 
and the articles of incorporation showed that the Standard Oil Com- 
pany did have a very large block of stock in the old Waters-Pierce 
Oil Company. It was my opinion that the Waters-Pierce Oil Com- 
pany was a party to the trust agreement with the Standard. It was 
a company recognized as one of the Standard Oil Companies. I am 
satisfied that the papers are right here in this Capital building now, 
but it is my recollection that they showed the proportionate amount 
of the stock that the Standard Oil Company had in this old Company. 

BAILEY CALLS ON HARDY IN JANUARY OR FEBRUARY, 1900. 

In a letter to the public press of Texas (Dallas News, October 
25, 1907), Honorable D. A. Hardy, Secretary of State in 1900, re- 
plying to the published letter of H. C. Pierce, nominally addressed 
to Governor Campbell, St. Louis, November 15th, said: 

"I make this communication for the purpose of keeping the rec- 
ord straight. Mr. Pierce's statement, in so far as it refers to the cir- 
cumstances of the issuance of the permit, by me, to the (new) Waters- 
Pierce Oil Company, is wholly untrue. He says that Senator Bailey 
"made an honest presentation of the facts to Secretary of State Hardy 
and Attorney General Smith, and in doing so was actuated by a de- 
sire to grant a favor asked of him by Mr. Francis, and to see that in- 
justice was not done to a company which had grown up with Texas." 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 473 

This statement is not only incorrect, but it is, further, an injustice 
to Senator Bailey. The Senator made no presentation of the facts to 
me whatever. His visit to me was some time in January or Feb- 
ruary. His remarks to me had reference to the "old" Waters-Pierce 
Oil Company. He, in substance, only asked me what were the prob- 
abilities of my issuing a permit to the company, if they now made an 
application, and would agree to come into the State and obey all her 
laws. My answer, as repeatedly stated heretofore in public print 
and otherwise, was that there were none. That the permit of the 
Waters-Pierce Oil Company to do business in Texas had been an- 
nulled and canceled by judgment of court, and that I did not think 
there was power anywhere in Texas outside of the Legislature to lift 
or call that judgment satisfied, no difiference what promises it might 
make." 

From the foregoing it would seem that Bailey had become in- 
terested in this Waters-Pierce litigation long before April 25, 1900 — 
the date he was supposed to have first met Pierce and to have "bor- 
rowed" $3,300 from the wealthy stranger. In this connection it is 
well to remember that Gruet testified that Pierce told him that he. 
Pierce, had introduced Bailey to the Standard Oil officials at 26 
Broadway late in the fall of 1899 or the early part of 1900. Mr. 
Hardy's statement above corroborates this suggestion of an earlier 
understanding between Pierce and Bailey than has been popularly 
supposed. 

S. B. KEMP, ESQUIRE, TESTIFIES CONCERNING TRAVIS COUNTY CAM- 
PAIGN. 

S. B. KEMP 

testified before the Bailey Investigation Committee (Report 1907, 
pages 385-387) as follows: 

I have lived in Austin about ten years. I know Senator Barrett. 
[The State Senator from Fannin County, Mr. Bailey's candidate for 
Congress against Congressman Randell in that district.] I also 
know Captain James Lucy. I know in a general way that Mr. Bar- 
rett was in the county making public addresses at different places, 
but whether Mr. Lucy took any active part — I know I conversed with 
him during the campaign. Captain Lucy advertises himself as the 
State Representative of The American Surety Company. 

[This is the company in connection with which John H. Kirby made the 
Waters-Pierce Oil company, a three and one-half million dollar bond in the ouster 
suit, 1907, which bond was perfected at Ft. Worth in the office of Capps, Cantey 
& Hanger, which latter firm was employed on behalf of the Waters-Pierce Oil com- 
pany or some of its stockholders, in the litigation before Judge Bryant. Thus we 
see Mr. Bailey's friends and Mr. Bailey's lawyers (Mr. Hanger having been one 
of his three attorneys before the Investigation Committee of 1907) find fat places 
with the oil trust. John D. Johnson is said also to be interested in the American 
Surety Company.] 



474 Senator J. W. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

Before the primary election [in which Bailey was running for an 
instructed vote, on the part of Travis county representatives in the 
30th legislature, in which election Mr. Bailey was defeated, even be- 
fore his second investigation,] about six o'clock in the afternoon Sen- 
ator Barrett came in to the Turf Exchange. He said to the man in 
charge, "Could I get you to cash a small check for me?" Dodson 
looked at the check and said, "Is this Captain Lucy here in Austin?" 
Mr. Barrett answered it was, and he cashed the check. I believe it 
was for $50.00. 

[Senator Barrett afterwards testified that he cashed two of Cap- 
tain Lucy's checks, each for $50.00, and spent the money for stamps 
in sending out Bailey literature in that campaign.] 

The next day Senator Barrett was making speeches in that county. 

At that point in Mr. Kemp's testimony the following interesting 
colloquy occurred, illustrative of the temper of Bailey's partisan Com- 
mitteemen. 

Q. Do you know where Senator Barrett spent Saturday, the day 
of the election? 

A. No, sir; I do not. 

Mr. Wolfe: It seems to me you ought to get down to Senator 
Bailey. Just come right down to the point. I do not care where he 
spent the day, nor the night either. 

Mr. Cocke: I expect later and I think I will be able to show 
Mr. Lucy was the local campaign manager. 

Senator Stone : If he was, what has that got to do with this inves- 
tigation? 

Mr. Cocke: It is under the allegation that these funds were 
spent here; that he was one of his three or four campaign managers, 
, and there is another incident to be drawn out just a little later. It 
may all be proper. I do not want to reflect on Senator Barrett or on 
Mr. Bailey, but I feel that I am doing a public duty in trying to find 
out whether they are true or false. 

Q. Do you know anything about Senator Barrett loaning or ad- 
vancing anybody money about the polls on Saturday following? 

A. No, sir; I do not know. 

Q. You have no personal knowledge? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Do you know how the vote stood in Austin as regards the 
majority for or against Mr. Bailey in the slum wards or the better 
class wards of the city? 

A. I do not believe I could answer the question anyway. 

The Chairman: It is not a proper question, and I will not allow 
it. 

Mr. Cocke: The purpose of the question, I would like to state, 
is to show that the intelligent, high class wards went two to three 
against him. 

Mr. Wolfe: We object to him making the statement now. 

The Chairman; I have overruled the question. 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 475 

Mr. Cocke: I just want to state the objeci. 

The Chairman : I think I fully understand what it is. 

MR. J. GREGG HILL TESTIFIES ABOUT TR.^VIS COUNTY CAMPAIGN OF 
JANUARY 5TH, 1907. 

MR. J. G. HILL 

a prominent business man of Austin of unquestioned veracity, testi- 
fied (Bailey Invest. Com. Report, 1907, pages 407-409), in sub- 
stance as follows : 

In regard to the Begley-Barrett money matter I will simply state 
this : On the day of the election I was in the store room where they 
were holding the election. I was standing sideways and so I could 
see. Mr. Barrett was standing to my left and Neal Begley walked in 
the front door. Begley nodded to Barrett and he went over in that 
direction. That threw Barrett's back to me. I saw Neal Begley's 
hand go up right in front of Barrett this way; I couldn't see his hand 
proper, I could the rest of it back this way. I could see Barrett's 
hand go down in his pocket and come out ; I heard the money rattle. I 
was standing I suppose ten feet from them. I didn't see the money, 
I heard the rattle, I will swear three times, and it sounded to me like 
four or five times. Neal's hand went down in his pocket, and he 
then went out in front, and got on the back end of a wagonette that 
was full of Confederate soldiers. In the meantime Barrett turned 
around and I mentioned the subject of money being used in the elc- 
tion. He says, "O, no. Hill we are not using any money." I says, 
"O, come ofif, Barrett; I saw you give the fellow money." He 
laughed and said, "I lent him some money." He didn't tell me at the 
time what the amount was. I says, "Now, Barrett, you know there 
isn't any law against using money in the election here to-day; what do 
you want to call it a loan for?" He says, "I will tell you what I did, 
Hill, I told him to take that money and treat those old fellows." 
That was the end of our conversation. Later on during the day I 
met Neal Begley in Seelig's cigar store on Congress avenue. I 
brought the subject up to Neal. He looked a little surprised at first, 
and I says, "O, well, I know all about it Neal," I says, "There is no 
use in denying it." He says, "Well, I borrowed five dollars from 
Senator Barrett." He made that admission in the presence of the 
owner of the cigar store. I says, "That is what Senator Barrett said 
at first; in the first place, it was a loan, and he then said he had told 
you to take that money and treat those old fellows," and he says, 
"That's what I did with the money." Later on during the after- 
noon, that night, I think, after dark, I met Senator Barrett on the 
street, and he asked me the name of the man that he had loaned the 
money to. That was all there was to it, 



476 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

J. GREGG HILL 

on examination by Mr. Cocke, testified as follows: 

Q. Did you pay any of your speakers during that campaign? 

A. No, sir; we did not. 

Q. Did you pay my expenses during that campaign? 

A. We did not. I offered to and you refused to accept it. 

Q. It is charged here, Mr. Hill, that the activities on the part of 
Senator Bailey's managers was unbecoming that of a United States 
Senator; I would like to know whether or not their activities, if you 
know, were most successful, and in what parts of the city their activ- 
ities were most in evidence? 

Objection was ofifered to this question and the objection was sus- 
tained by Chairman O'Neal. 

BAILEY AND WATERS-PIERCE BANK AT THE SAME PLACE. 

MR. E. M. REARDON 

of Dallas, Texas, testified to the Bailey Invest. Com. 1907, page 569, 
in substance, as follows: 

I reside in Dallas; am vice-president of the American Exchange 
National Bank. The Waters-Pierce Oil Company has had an ac- 
count with us for many years. Mr. Bailey has done some business 
with the bank for many years, but not active check account. That 
was the bank where the Gibbs Land deal checks passed through. 
Senator Bailey has had business relations with our bank ever since I 
have been in it, but not in the regular way. 

B. F. MC NULTY, "SPECIAL AGENT" OF WATERS- PIERCE OIL COMPANY, 
APPEARS BEFORE THE COMMITTEE. 

MR. B. F. MC NULTY. 

having been summoned to appear before the Committee by the pro- 
ponent of the charges, was sworn and testified (Bailey Invest. Com. 
Report, 1907, pp. 498-500), in substance, as follows: 

I am special agent of the Waters-Pierce Oil Company for the 
State; have held that position about fifteen months. I give all my 
time to the business of the Company. I supervise the agents, look 
after the dififerences of the agents, between them and their trade, 
look after the property and inspect and report on the condition of 
property, and make general suggestions about the trade and property. 
Mr. B. F. Yoakum is the first gentleman who recommended me for 
the place. I wired Mr. Bailey and asked him if he would give me 
a recommendation and I did not receive a reply, he was away from 
home — I didn't receive a reply until after I had been employed by the 
Company. 

Q. Isn't it a fact that you were refused the position, Mr. Mc- 
Nulty, until Mr. Bailey should endorse your application? 

A. No, sir! no, sir. 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 477 

Q. You don't know whether or not Mr. Bailey communicated as 
a matter of fact with the management of the Waters-Pierce Oil Com- 
pany, do you, on your application? 

A. No, sir; I do not — 

Q. You can't tell whether he did or not? 

A. I never heard of it if he did. I wired him first and asked 
him if he would give me a recommendation. 

Q. Where did you wire him to? 

A. I wired him at Gainesville, Texas. 

Q. Was he supposed to be there then? 

A. I thought he was, I didn't know whether he was or not. I 
asked him if he would give me a recommendation and he wired back 
he would, but I didn't get the answer until after I returned from New 
York and I had been already employed by Mr. Pierce. 

Q. You went to New York to see Mr. Pierce? 

A. I was in New York on other business, and while there I got 
a letter from Mr. Yoakum and Mr. House, and was employed by 
Mr. Pierce, told to report at the St. Louis office and they would give 
me — 

Q. Did you tell Mr. Pierce you were acquainted with Mr. 
Bailey? 

A. Yes, sir; I told him I could get a great many references in 
Texas and New York. I told him I thought I could give Senator 
Bailey, Senator Culberson, Governor Lanham, a great many of them, 
Mr. House — 

Q. Do your duties require you to travel about over the State 
some, Mr. McNulty? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Have you been active in Mr. Bailey's support in this sena- 
torial controversy? 

A. No, sir; not especially, only as a personal friend. I have 
been a personal friend of Mr. Bailey's, been a friend of his for a 
good many years. 

Q. Did you do what you could in the local campaign here some 
weeks ago? 

A. I don't think I did anything, Mr. Cocke; I don't think I did 
anything in the campaign for Mr. Bailey, I couldn't very well do 
it, the position I was in. 

Q. During the past summer did you interest yourself in the atti- 
tude of the candidates for the present Legislature on the Bailey mat- 
ter? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Did you on the train between Austin and San Antonio or 
between Austin and any other point in Texas, say to Mr. Sterling P. 
Strong that you were traveling about and seeing that nobody was 
elected to the Legislature not favorable to Mr. Bailey? 

A. No, sir; I did not. I never discussed Mr. Bailey with Ster- 
ling P. Strong in my life. 1 haven't seen him since about June. 



478 Senator J. W. Bailey of Texas Umnasked 

Q. Did you make that statement to anybody? 

A. No, sir; I did not. It wouldn't have been true if I had. 

Comment. — From the foregoing it will appear very likely that 
Bailey and Pierce conferred together about this appointment. Mc- 
Nulty simply didn't get a reply from Mr. Bailey until he left New 
York but that does not mean that Mr. Bailey may not have previously 
communicated with Pierce or vice versa. 

Mr. Sterling P. Strong was summoned as a witness by the propo- 
nent of the charges and by him, according to his statement to the 
member of the Legislature who so informed the proponent of the 
charges, it was expected to show that McNulty had told Strong dur- 
ing the summer of 1906 that he was making it his business to travel 
over the State and see that no man was elected to the Legislature un- 
friendly to Bailey, so far as that could be done. Whether or not Mr. 
Strong would have so testified at Austin is not known but it is known 
that he so advised a member of the 30th House who had talked to Mr. 
Strong. Mr. Strong was seemingly very anxious to avoid testifying 
as repeated efiforts were made to get him. (See Bailey Invest. Com. 
Report, 1907, p. 171). 

We have the admission above from Mr. McNulty that he at least 
saw Mr. Strong in June, 1906, before the Democratic Primaries of 
July 28th. 




HON. JEWELL P. LIGHTFOOT, 

Assistant jVttorney-General of Texas. 

Great credit is due to Mr. Lightfoot for the able part he has taken under 
Attorney-General R. V. Davidson in tlie successful prosecution of unlawful 
combinations in restraint of trade in Te.xas. 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 479 

CHAPTER XIX. 
THE STRANGE STORY OF A FAMOUS DRAFT. 

BAILEY TO DAVIDSON. 
H ENRY & STRI B LI NG DRAFT. 

Austin, Texas, December 6, (Galveston News, Dec. yth), 1906. 
In his reply to Attorney-General Davidson, in regard to the $1,500 
draft, Mr. Bailey said: 

"I have never given a draft to Henry & Stribling for any amount 
on the Waters-Pierce Oil Company or on H. C. Pierce or on J. D. 
Johnson; nor have I ever given a draft to Henry & Stribling, or to 
either of them on anybody or for any amount. If you have in your 
possession such draft, or if there be any such paper in existence it is 
a downright and flagrant forgery." 

Dallas, Texas, December 8, (Galveston News, December 9th), 
1906. Mr. Bailey used the following language in replying to At- 
torney-General Davidson's open letter: 

"I could point out other particulars in which the memoranda you 
publish negatives, like this, the presumptions which you sought to 
raise." 

REFER TO bank's STAMPS. 

"But it is unnecessary to pursue this particular branch of the sub- 
ject further, because there is one item in this controversy which ought 
to be accepted as decisive, and that item is the Henry & Stribling 
draft. This is the one point which you assert, and which I deny, that 
is susceptible of absolute and positive proof if the facts exist, as you 
have alleged them. If I ever drew a draft in favor of Henry & Strib- 
ling, or either of them, that draft will show on the back of it the in- 
dorsement of every bank through which it passed in the course of col- 
lection, and every bank through which it passed made an entry of it 
on its books. It must have passed through at least two banks — the 
one which forwarded it and the one which collected it. 

"Thus it is certain that if you have any draft in your possession 
you can tell from the indorsements on the back of it the banks 
through which it passed, and by a simple application to those banks 
you can find the transaction entered on their books. You can there- 
fore establish by competent, disinterested and reputable witnesses 
that I gave this draft, if, in fact, I did give it. 

WILL RESIGN IF CHARGE IS PROVEN. 

"Now, sir, if you can prove by any single bank that I ever drew a 
draft in favor of Henry & Stribling, or either of them, on the Waters- 
Pierce Company, or H. C. Pierce, or J. D. Johnson, or any other in- 



480 Senator J. W. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

dividual out of the firm or corporation for $1,500, or for any other 
sum, I will resign my seat in the Senate and I will retire forever from 
public life. I will go further than this: If you can produce any 
order, receipt, or memorandum in favor of Henry & Stribling, or 
either of them, bearing my signature, indorsement or approval, I will 
resign my seat in the Senate and retire forever from public life. 

"I never heard of a loan to Stribling by the Waters-Pierce Oil 
Company, or H. C. Pierce, or J. D. Johnson, and the purported tele- 
gram which you print about it was never mentioned to me directly or 
remotely by any man or at any time. I never mentioned to Mr. Strib- 
ling, nor did he ever mention to me, any loan or note or draft with the 
Waters-Pierce Oil Company, or H. C. Pierce, or J. D. Johnson, or 
any other person, firm or corporation. 

[The reason why Mr. Bailey laid such stress on this $1,500 draft 
was the fact that he, himself, had prabably destroyed it in November, 
1900, when Francis sent it to him together with the $3,300 note that 
he had signed, thus enabling Bailey to destroy the only signatures that 
he had perhaps given Pierce up to that time.] 

At Belton, Texas, December 14th, (Galveston News, December 
15th), 1906, concerning the $1,500 Henry-Stribling-Pierce-Bailey 
draft, Mr. Bailey said. "Now let us go a step further. No, I will not 
detain you longer with that. There is one way to settle it once and for 
all time. These men, (Attorney General Davidson and his asso- 
ciates), demand in their notice that the defendant produce a draft 
which they claim I drew on the Waters-Pierce Oil Company in favor 
of Henry & Stribling. * * * I answered him [the Attorney Gen- 
eral] saying, 'Sir, if you can prove that I ever drew a draft, endorsed 
a draft, order or note or memorandum of any kind in favor of Henry 
& Stribling, or either of them, for $1,500, or any other amount, I will 
resign my seat in the Senate and retire forever to private life.' That 
makes a sharp issue. If there is such a draft he can prove it." 

Senator Bailey here explained, as he did in his last open letter to 
Attorney General Davidson, the manner in which drafts are handled 
for collection, complete record of them being kept by each bank 
through which they pass. He said that if there had been such a draft 
there must be a record of it in at least two banks and that these bank 
records could not have been fixed up just to suit a political purpose, 
because the interest would be in the wrong place. But he declared 
that while the evidence of an actual draft could thus easily and cer- 
tainly be obtained, they never could get the evidence of this alleged 
draft for the reason that it never existed. 

"I don't know who is lying," said Mr. Bailey. "They can end 
this contest now and forever just by producing the draft which they 
say they have. [Attorney General Davidson never claimed to have 
the draft but gave notice to the Company to produce it. His infor- 
mation concerning the draft was based on a telegram from Pierce to 
Finlay and other data.] They can retire me in confusion and dis- 
grace. Do you know why I believe Davidson would not let me see 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 481 

those papers. [Davidson ofifered to let him see them if he would first 
deny that he had gotten any money from Pierce or the Waters-Pierce 
Oil Company.] I have no doubt that he has some paper with my 
name upon it — a forgery — but he knew that if he showed it to me I 
would turn it over and look for the bank endorsements. * * * i 
say there is no such draft. If they have it, then I have been guilty of 
duplicity and falsehood and I would relieve my friends from defend- 
ing me another day. Under that challenge ought they not produce 
the draft or acknowledge their lie? * * * They must do it or 
stand convicted by the public. Suppose I drew a draft like that — 
do you suppose I would have denied it? / have never denied any- 
thing in my life." 

Comanche, Texas, December i8, (Galveston News, Dec. 19th, 
1906.) — Referring to the $1,500 draft which he himself had de- 
stroyed, and concerning which he offered to resign "if they would 
produce such a draft," Mr. Bailey asked, "Ought they not resign un- 
less they do produce it or trace it through the banks? * * * jf 
they can prove [the draft] it will convict me of a falsehood. Bring 
on the draft and convict me of a falsehood." 

[Bailey knew they could not produce it or trace it, because he, 
himself, had gotten it back and destroyed it.'\ 

De Leon, Texas, December 19, (Galveston, Texas, December 
20th, 1906.) — "Bank endorsements are not on the draft and this at 
once exposes the forgeries. You see the injustice which Davidson 
committed by refusing to let me see the papers so I could not answer 
them as they are." 

At Dublin, Texas, December 21, (Galveston News, December 
22nd, 1906), the brilliant Senator from Texas said: "That telegram 
[which was sent from Pierce to Finlay, June, 1900, advising that 
Bailey should quiet all Texas parties] is a forgery just like the draft 
is a forgery. They don't claim that the telegram was sent to me, but 
to some one else. The telegram was dated June 12th and the draft 
June 15th. They forged the telegram to lay the predicate for forg- 
ing the draft, but I have caught them by calling upon them to show 
the bank's endorsement or the bank record. Somehow God has so 
created the universe that a lie cannot prevail. They simply tried to 
forge too much. * * * j can say positively that the draft is a 
forgery, because it is said to be signed by me. I know that the draft 
which is supposed to be based on the telegram is a forgery. Hence I 
believe that the telegram is a forgery. * * * I do know that the 
man who says I signed that draft is a liar." 

FROM bailey's AUSTIN SKATING RINK SPEECH, JAN. 3RD, 1907. 

(Dallas News, Jan. 4.) 
"They stole these notes of mine. They stole this voucher of mine, 
and they would have stolen that draft of mine if any such draft had 
been given. [His notes, vouchers and drafts had gotten in bad com- 
pany.] I will say that I never heard of a check for $1,500 or any other 



482 Senator J. W. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

amount between Henry & Stribling and the Waters-Pierce Oil Com- 
pany or between either of them and the Waters-Pierce Oil Company 
and that I have had no more to do with it than Charles Fred Tucker 
had to do with the salvation of immortal souls. [Mind you he was 
very careful not to say that he had never drawn a draft on H. C. Pierce 
for the $1,500 in question; was always careful to say that he did not 
draw a draft on the Waters-Pierce Oil Company, and thus is his ve- 
racity above question. There are two kinds of lies, a direct lie and an 
indirect one. The indirect lie is frequently a double lie.] * * * 
I said that if they would produce a note or a draft, an order or a paper 
of any kind signed by me, endorsed by me or approved by me, I would 
resign my seat in the Senate and retire forever from public life. Isn't 
that broad enough? Do you know what these devils require of me? 
If they were to ask me if I went to church last Sunday and I would 
say no [note the equivocation that was evidently present in his mind 
about the draft he did in fact draw on Pierce as was afterwards acci- 
dently shown], they would want me to stand up every other Sunday 
and say that I had gone to church every other Sunday since I was 
born. 

"Whose business is it when I borrow money as long as I keep my 
private and my public business separate and apart. [But that is the 
very question in issue as to whether or not he has done so.] Let these 
miserable dogs point to an instance of my public life where my pri- 
vate interest influenced my public duties, and I will discuss with them 
my private transactions from the cradle to this good hour. 

"They will have the right kind of an Attorney General in Texas 
[a Bailey-Standard Oil 'kind'] some of these days. 

THE CHRONOLOGY OF A MISSING DRAFT. 

May 3, 1900. — Waters-Pierce Oil Company offers Henry & Strib- 
ling, attorneys for the state, a $3,000 fee in part compromise of 
Waco litigation. 

June 5, 1900. — Hon. George Clark, Waco, Texas, local attorney, 
writes J. D. Johnson, St. Louis, general attorney for the Waters- 
Pierce Oil Company, asking him to have Bailey communicate 
with Stribling; that Stribling is very much dissatisfied and is 
threatening the company with a receivership. It would require 
two or three days for this letter to reach St. Louis, 

June 10 (about), 1900. — Senator Bailey passed through St. Louis 
enroute from Washington to Gainesville, and doubtless conferred 
with J. D. Johnson, who had just received Clark's letter of June 
5th. Johnson, Finlay or Bailey doubtless wrote Pierce so as to 
reach him by June 12th. 

June 12, 1900. — H. C. Pierce, at Lake Nebagamon, Wis., wires An- 
drew M. Finlay, vice-president, St. Louis: "If Johnson approves 
authorize Bailey to loan Stribling $1,500 on his note. Bailey 
should quiet all Texas parties. Tell him I will see him soon." 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 483 

June 13, 1900. — J. W. Bailey, at Gainesville, Texas, draws a draft 
through the Red River National bank on H. C. Pierce, St. Louis, 
for $1,500. It would take this draft two days to reach St. Louis. 

June 15, 1900. — J. D. Johnson O. K.'s a voucher for $1,500 on the 
Waters- Pierce Oil Company in favor of Henry & Stribling, "ac- 
count of expenses anti-trust civil cases. State of Texas vs. W.-P. 
O. Co., at Waco." 

June 16, 1900. — J. D. Johnson, St. Louis, writes George Clark, Waco : 
"Have arranged to satisfy Henry & Stribling at least for the time 
being." 

August 17, 1900. — Francis writes to H. Clay Pierce: "Dear Clay: 
Our friend Bailey, it appears, has been violently attacked in Texas 
for his efforts there in your behalf. * * * He writes that he 
is able to take care of himself 'against the miserable wretches who 
are so desperately trying to destroy (him) me.' He says he will 
be here tomorrow." (Committee Report, p. 681.) [It is thus 
seen that Francis was interesting himself in getting Bailey cleared 
up, and that is doubtless why he afterwards arranged with Pierce 
and Bailey for the latter to get back his signed receipt for the 
$3,300 and Bailey's signed draft on Pierce for $1,500.] 

Oct. 29, 1900. — Henry & Stribling withdraw and retire from the 
Waco civil suit against Waters-Pierce Oil Company. 

Nov. 3, 1900. — Judge Sam Scott dismisses on a plea in abatement 
civil suit against Waters-Pierce Oil Company. 

Nov. — , 1900. — George Clark at Waco writes J. D. Johnson, St. 
Louis, a very confidential letter. 

Nov. 12, 1900. — J. D. Johnson writes George Clark "with respect to 
the confidential one I agree with you that it would not be advisa- 
ble for Mr. S. to come to St. Louis at this time." Further suggest- 
ing that he could meet him at some convenient point. 

Nov. 17, 1900. — This notation is made upon the $1,500 voucher, to- 
wit: "Draft delivered to Mr. H. C. Pierce by Mr. Gruet Novem- 
ber 17." In the handwriting of Naudain. 

Nov. 20, 1900. — Waters-Pierce Oil Company issues its voucher for 
$3,100, which Mr. Stribling testifies was in payment of $3,000 fee 
to lobby against unfavorable legislation by a legislature not yet 
convened and the $100 being expense for his trip to St. Louis. 

Nov. 21, 1900. — Stribling and Bailey arrive in St. Louis. 

Nov. 22, 1900. — David R. Francis, a friend and backer of Bailey, 
takes up the draft dated at Gainesville, Texas, June 13, 1900. 

Nov. 22, 1900. — David R. Francis mails the above described sight 
draft to J. W. Bailey at Washington. (Com. Rept. p. 682.) 

Dec. 14, 1900. — At Belton, Texas, Bailey said: "I say there is no 
such draft. If they have it then I have been guilty of duplicity and 
falsehood, and I will relieve my friends from defending me an- 
other day. Under that challenge ought they not to produce that 
draft or acknowledge their lie?" 



484 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

BAILEY APPLIES STRIBLING $1,500 "LOAN" TO HIS OWN USES. 

Governor Francis having accidently disclosed to the Committee, 
in his letter of November 22, 1900, to "Dear Clay" (Com. Rept., p. 
682) , the fact that Bailey did draw the famous $1,^00 draft on Pierce 
and the further fact that he, Francis, had returned the said original 
draft to Bailey, it became necessary for Bailey and his lawyers, on ac- 
count of Bailey's previous denial that he had gotten this money for 
Stribling, to show that Bailey, himself, used the money instead of pay- 
ing it over to Stribling. For that purpose Mr. Wolfe telegraphed to 
J. M. Potter, a Bailey partisan of Gainesville, Texas, and had Chair- 
man O'Neal sign it and requesting the said Potter to appear as a wit- 
ness before the Committee. His testimony will be found pages 729- 
739 and is in substance as follows: 

My name is J. M. Potter; was living in Gainesville in the year 
1900. Was in the banking business; president of the Red River Na- 
tional bank and was such in June, 1900. I have here the record of 
certain drafts drawn by Senator Bailey in the month of June, 1900. 
The first record of it is in this Teller's blotter, of original entry of all 
drafts drawn on banks, or on parties, for which we paid money or gave 
credit to individuals. I see June 13, 1900, a record of a draft. There 
is no number on the draft. The first column used here is the date, the 
date on the draft — dated June 13, 1900. 

Q. What is the next column? 

A. The next column is the name of the person who draws the 
draft. 

Q. What is the name there? 

A. J. W. Bailey. 

Q. What is the next column? 

A. The next column is the person on whom the draft is drawn, 
or the payer of the draft. 

Q. Who is in that account? 

A. That is "H. C. Pierce, St. Louis." 

Q. The next column? 

A. That next column is the owner of the draft. For instance, if 
that had been drawn on John Smith and endorsed by John Smith his 
name would have been in this column. 

Q. Whose name is in this column? 

A. Oh, the name of J. W. Bailey is there, showing there was no 
endorsement. In this column is the amount of the draft. 

Q. What is that amount? 

A. Fifteen hundred dollars. The next column shows the total 
amount charged to this bank on that date. 

Q. What bank was that? 

A. That was the State National Bank of St. Louis. On June 13, 
1900, you see Mr. Bailey got credit for $1,1500. 

Q. That is the day of the drawing of the draft? 

A. That is the day he drew this draft, this $1,500 draft, and since 



The Political life-Story of a Fallen Idol 485 

it was charged to a bank it must have been credited to somebody, and 
so, since that book shows it belonged to Mr. Bailey, it went to his 
credit on this individual deposit book. 

Q. Have you anything on there, that sheet, or the teller's blotter, 
showing whether any amounts were checked out on that day? 

A. Yes, sir. On this sheet a check, in keeping this book, was al- 
ways written in red ink. On the day that he got credit for this $1,500 
draft there shows to have been a check drawn for $509.50. 

Q. Have you anything on any books or sheets showing what that 
was for? 

A. Yes, sir; on this teller's blotter. 

Q. Page what? 

A. Over there (indicating) we credited out all notes paid on that 
day, or interest paid on those notes. I find on that day that Mr. Bailey 
paid three small notes. 

Q. What day? 

A. June 13, 1900, he paid three small notes, and in that little 
place along there (indicating) is where we charged up past due in- 
terest, or anything like that. That $7.30 marked "Bailey" — that was 
evidently the past due interest on these notes. These three notes he 
paid, and that little interest charged there, amount to the same as this 
check he gave us. 

Q. What is that amount? 

A. $509-50. 

Question — Does your record there show any other disposition of 
that $1,500. If so, give the amounts and the dates. 

Answer. — It shows that the next day, on June 14, 1900, he gave a 
check on this account for $656.06; and on the following day, June 15, 
he checked on it for $50; on the next day, the i6th, he checked on it 
for $40; and then the next check on it is— on the 19th he checked on it 
for $40.45; and on the 21st he checked on it for $100, and then again 
on the 25th he checked for $160.85. However, the amount of that 
draft we credited had run down to $103.99, and on June 25th he de- 
posited $415.25, and checked $160.85. 

Q. When that check for $160.85 was drawn that exhausted the 
$1,500? 

A. Yes, sir; more than exhausted it. He only had a balance of 
$103.99 before he made that. 

BAILEY BANK BOOK ERASURES. 

Mr. Potter (continuing, p. 731) — 

Cross-examination by Mr. Cocke: 

Q. You are an expert accountant, are you, Mr. Potter? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. You are experienced in these matters, though? 

A. Yes, sir. 



486 Senator J. W. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

Q. Doesn't this entry (indicating) show an erasure there under 
the name of Pierce? 

A. Well, it shows it has been blotted or blurred, rubbed out — 
something. It shows there might have been some little error made in 
writing it down — might have put down the wrong letter or something, 
though it is very plain as it is — plainly "H. C. Pierce." 

Q. It is equally certain there has been something else there, isn't 
it? 

A. Well, no, I think not — I mean any other writing. There 
might have been a mark of some kind there, indeed. A pencil fresh 
sharpened might have blurred a little and rubbed off that way. It 
looks like there might have been something there. It is blurred, 
though, in some way. 

Q. And doesn't that extend more than over the space of one mark 
or one letter, that apparent erasure? 

A. Yes; it blots the "C" a little and something in the word 
"Pierce." 

Q. Perhaps you would catch it more clearly with the glass. 

A. No, sir; I can see the blur there. 

Q. It is the only one on that page isn't it? 

A. Yes, sir; I believe so. 

BANKER POTTER CUTS LEAVES FROM HIS BANK BOOK INSTEAD OF PRE- 
SENTING THE BOOKS IN THEIR ENTIRETY. 

Re-examination by Mr. Cocke: 

Question — Have you any idea when this erasure was made? 

Answer — Indeed, I have none. I suppose it was done at the time 
the original entry was made. 

Q. When did you reach the city, Mr. Potter? 

A. Yesterday morning — you mean Austin? 

Q. Yes, sir; whom have you discussed this matter with, and to 
whom have you shown these books and these sheets? 

A. I have shown them to Senator Hanger. I believe Mr. Jones 
was present. 

Q. Any one else? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Are you positive about that? 

A. I do not think I have. I am quite sure I have not. 

Q. Did you leave them with him? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Have you had them in your possession all the time? 

A. I came up here yesterday morning thinking I would meet the 
committee. I had been summoned to appear before the committee 
yesterday morning at lo o'clock, and I brought the book and came up 
here, and after getting here I found out the committee was not going 
to meet, at least in the forenoon, and through the kindness of some gen- 
tleman — I asked what I could do with the book, and he suggested I 
put it in the clerk's office and so I had it tied up in a piece of paper 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 487 

and took it in the clerk's office and put it away, and I have not seen it 
since then until I went and got it today. 

Q. Did you show it to any one else until you went on the stand? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Where did this sheet come from, Mr. Potter? 

A. This sheet out of the cash book is just cut out of it. 

Q. Why didn't you bring the cash book? 

A. Because it did not show a thing in the world with reference 
to this, outside of this sheet. 

Q. Is it customary to cut your books up in this ivay? 

A. No, sir; but it is an old book, and I had no further use for it, 
and / wanted to show this particular item. 

Q. This is what we call the "loose leaf" system of bookkeeping? 

A. No, sir; neither of those. 

Q. So you cut it out of your book in place of bringing your book? 

A. Yes, sir; and in this book we kept the individual accounts — 
we were keeping the individual accounts on what is called the "Bos- 
ton" ledger — will weigh about forty pounds, I suppose. 

Q. Is this the loose sheet — 

A. No, sir; I cut that out to show the record of this particular 
item. 

Q. What is this sheet? 

A. This is a sheet from the cash book. 

Q. That is also cut out, isn't it? 

A. That is the debit side of the cash book on that day, merely to 
show what entries there were charged to the State National Bank of 
St. Louis on that day. 

Q. Are all your cash books kept in lead pencil that way? 

A. That is not in lead pencil. 

Q. Excuse me. Inspect this side. Am I mistaken about this 
being in lead pencil? 

A. Yes, sir; this is in ink? 

Q. Your blotter is in pencil, isn't it? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You can not say, then, one way or the other, whether he had 
any other account there or at the Riggs National Bank at Washington? 

A. No, sir ; I do not know anything about that. 

Q. Do you know anything of Mr. Bailey's financial condition at 
that time? 

A. Well, I do not know positively, no. I could not swear to his 
financial condition. I could tell what I think it was at the time, but I 
do not know — I could not say that I know it. 

Q. Well, what is your information based on? 

A. Well, I do not think he was in affluence, by any means. 

Q. Were these three little notes over due? 

A. I do not know, sir. / jm/)/)05<? M^y w^r^, by that little interest 
credited there. I just suppose that is past due interest. I don't know. 

Q. Can't you tell from the bank records from time to time after 



488 Senator J. W. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

a note is paid, whether it was paid on or before maturity, or after- 
wards? 

A. Yes, sir; I can. 

Q. But you have not any records here to show? 

A. No, sir; I could go back, if I had the books and hunt up and 
show when those notes matured, whether they were all due, or only 
one of them, on what is called a note register, or discount register. 

Q. Do you mean to say that the sheets you have presented here 
show the exact condition of all his monetary dealings with his bank 
at the time and dates under consideration? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. What other records might be involved, and what other trans- 
actions might be — 

A. Well, he might have had a note there. He might have owed 
the bank a note at the time. 

Q. In addition to these three notes? 

A. Yes, sir; he might have. 

POTTER DOES NOT KNOW WHAT BECAME OF THE MONEY EXCEPT FIVE 
HUNDRED DOLLARS. 

The witness. Potter: 

Q. In stating that your records do not disclose as far as you know 
any dealings between Mr. Bailey and Mr. Stribling, or Henry & 
Stribling, about this time, you do not mean to suggest that such deal- 
ings might not have taken place outside of your institution, do you? 

A. Why certainly not, I do not know anything about that. 

Well, it shows that he paid the Red River National Bank $500 and 
some odd of it. I do not know what he did with the rest of it. The 
record shows he checked it out, but I do not know anything about what 
he did with it. 

Q. You do not mean to suggest from your records, do you, what 
he did with the balance of the money after paying off the notes he 
ov/ed the bank? 

A. I have already told you I do not know a thing in the world 
about what he did with the money. 

Q. You do not know whether those checks were payable to Henry 
& Stribling, or to whom they were payable? 

A. No, sir; I do not know anything about them. 

Question — And this would indicate that at the time of drawing 
this draft on the 13th he did not have any money, you assume? 

Answer — No; he did not have any money in the bank. He did 
not have anything to his credit. It is blank all along there. 

Q. This page begins with what date? 

A. This page begins with May 29. 

Q. Between May 29th and June 13th he had nothing? 

A. So far as these sheets go; yes, that is right. Between May 2Q 
and up to June / ? he did not have anything to his credit. 

Q. What did your bank do with the draft when it received it? 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 489 

A. You mean the $1,500 draft? 

Q. Yes, sir. What became of the draft? 

A. We charged it to the State National Bank, St. Louis, and 
while I have no letter with me showing that we mailed it to them — 

Q. Well, that is the due course of business? 

A. It is the due course of business, and, of course, that is what we 
did with it. 

Q. And it went on to St. Louis? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Well, what finally in due course of business would become of 
drafts of that kind? Would they come back to your bank or not? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Where would it lodge, finally? 

A. It would go to the payer, and after he pays it he can do what- 
ever he chooses with it — burn it up, or tear it up, or file it away — do 
just as he likes about that. [That is just what Bailey did with that 
famous $1,500 draft when he got it back, because it bore his signa- 
ture.] 

POTTER REFUSES TO DELIVER BANK BOOK. 

The Witness Potter: 

My recollection is that this particular book, out of ivhich I cut 
these leaves, is pretty well filled. It must have been used up pretty 
well. 

Q. Is that book available for the use of this committee? 

A. IVhy, I sliould not think so. It is a book of private ac- 
counts. 

Q. Well, what I am asking is, would you be willing to turn the 
book over to this committee for the purpose of such investigation as 
might be necessary? 

A. I do not know, now. That book now they ask me to leave is 
a book with such records in it that I do not think this investigating 
committee has got any business to know anything about. I do not 
know whether I would be justified in turning over the bank's private 
books to the committee or not. 

Q. Well, I am just asking you that question. 

A. I do not believe I would be justified in doing it. I would like 
to do whatever is right about it, but I do not feel just like it is the 
proper thing to do. 

Q. You understand, I am just asking you whether you would 
be willing to do it. 

A. No, sir; I would not be willing to do it. 

$1,500 DR.AFT SHOULD HAVE REACHED ST. LOUIS JUNE 15TH. 

Mr. Potter (Continuing p. 737) — 

By Mr. Cocke: 

Q. If you mailed the draft described in the teller's blotter 
promptly on the afternoon or evening of June 13, 1900, at what time, 
in due order of business, would it likely be presented for payment in 
St. Louis on the drawee? 



490 Senator J. W. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

A. Well, if we mailed it in the afternoon of the 13th it ought to 
reach St. Louis on the night of the 14th, and be presented in due order 
of business on the 15th, with no interruptions. [And June 15th is the 
very day that the Waters-Pierce Oil Company made out their $1,500 
voucher to cover this draft and the next day, June i6th, Johnson 
wrote Clark : "I have arranged to satisfy, at least for the time being, 
Henry & Stribling. This is strictly confidential."^ 

Mr. McGregor: Who was your correspondent in St. Louis? 

A. The State National Bank of St. Louis. 

Mr. McGregor: They will have a record of these checks and 
drafts you sent them? 

A. Yes, sir. 

[But Bailey refused to let the sub-committee "track him around 
over the country," to find out the truth about all these matters by 
going to St. Louis, Washington and New York.] 
San Antonio Express, December id, IQOd: 

" * * * The voucher printed by the attorney-general show- 
ing I [Bailey] had received money from H. Clay Pierce to the 
amount of $1,500 was borrowed by me on one occasion when I 
wanted to buy a horse." 

[The testimony of Bailey's Gainesville banker, Mr. J. M. Potter, 
(Committee Report pp. 729-739) showed that Bailey spent $509.50 
of this $1,500 in settlement of some over due notes that he owed the 
bank, and that during the next thirty days he drew the balance of it 
in a number of different amounts. Although he evidently got this 
$1,500 from the oil people with the understanding that he should 
"quiet" Stribling therewith, as a matter of fact he seems to have 
"quieted Stribling" some other way and to have applied the money 
to his own uses, and now tries to make it appear that he "borrowed" 
the $1,500 "on one occasion to buy a horse."] 

WHO SHOULD resign: bailey or his opponents? 

"Davidson says the incident is closed so far as he is concerned. It is not closed 
so far as I [Bailey] am concerned. If I offer to resign if they can produce the draft, 
ought they not to resign if they cannot produce it." [We did produce evidence that 
Bailey had himself gotten the draft back on November 22, 1900; ought he not to 
resign?^ 

EUREKA! 

Francis to Bailey. (Com. Rept. p. 682.) 

St. Louis, November 22nd, 1900. 
Hon. Jos. W. Bailey. Washington, D. C. 

My Dear Sir: I today paid Mr. H. C. Pierce $4,800 [but Francis could not 
tell the Investigation Committee from what source he received this so-called repay- 
ment to Pierce] and asked him to send me in exchange therefor whatever drafts or 
receipts for money made by you he might have in his possession. [Pierce had gotten 
the draft out of the files of the Company just five days before, doubtless in anticipation 
of this proposed transmission to Bailey through Francis, in order that they might thus 
manufacture the testimony of a third witness to his bogus repayment.] * » • 
He made no reply to my letter other than to send me the enclosed which I forward to 
you, the same being your receipt of April 25th, 1900, for $3,300, which the voucher 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 491 

designates as "a demand loan," and your sight draft on him, dated Gainesville, June 
IZth, 1900, for $1,500. * * * As Congress will meet on Monday next, you will 
no doubt remain in Washington until about the holidays. Keep me advised as to your 
movements. With best wishes, I am, respectfully yours, 

"David R. Francis." 

The foregoing reference by Francis to "the voucher," indicates 
that Bailey, Pierce and Francis had discussed this whole record be- 
tween themselves and agreed that Fierce should return to Bailey, 
through Francis, the only signed documents that Pierce or the 
Waters-Pierce Oil Company then held against Bailey. It is to be 
noted that Bailey executed no signed documents, letters, notes, or 
anything of that kind even to Pierce after that until subsequent to 
his first investigation in January, 1901. Having escaped exposure 
through that first whitewash, Bailey then became bolder and on the 
first day of March, 1901, the day preceding the anniversary of Texas 
Independence, Bailey gave Pierce his note for $8,000, and on March 
4th, 1901, Pierce wrote the Secretary of the Waters-Pierce Oil Com- 
pany that he "had given Bailey" his check for the $8,000 and for 
the Company to reimburse him (Pierce) by depositing the Com- 
pany's check for like amount to Pierce's individual credit in the 
Fourth National Bank of St. Louis. Tliat was tJie very day that 
Bailey was first sworn in as a U. S. Senator from Texas. Thus did 
Bailey accept an $8,000 "mess" of trust-made "pottage" before he 
took the oath of office as our Senator and began to draw the people's 
pay. 



492 Senator J. IT. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 



ANTIDOTES FOR BAILEYISM. 



It is a poor rule that has no exceptions. Anon. 

He that is extravagant will soon become poor, and poverty will en- 
force dependence, and invite corruption. — Johnson. 

The passion of acquiring riches in order to support a vain expense, 
corrupts the purest souls. — Fcnelon. 

The blast that blows loudest is soonest overblown. — Smollett. 

Political parties beget power for evil when wrongfully used as 
well as for good when not abused. — The Author. 

Sometimes a noble failure serves the world as faithfully as a dis- 
tinguished success. — Dowden. 

There is only one real failure in life that is possible, and that is, 
not to be true to the best one icnows. — Farrar. 

Dishonor waits on perfidy. A man should blush to think a false- 
hood ; it is the crime of cowards. — C. Johnson. 

The lie of fear is the refuge of cowardice and the lie of fraud the 
device of the cheat. — Edward Bellamy. 

A lie has always a certain amount of weight with those who wish 
to believe it. — E. JV. Rice. 

Every political party that is unable or unwilling to vouch for its 
nominees and to clean out its own Augean stables, when necessary for 
political sanitation, is lacking in the qualities essential to upright and 
honest government. — The Author. 

Falsehood, like the dry rot, flourishes the more in proportion as 
air and light are excluded. — JVhately. 

Although the devil be the father of lies, he seems, like great inven- 
tors, to have lost much of his reputation by the continual improve- 
ments that have been made upon him. — Swift. 

Falsehood often lurks upon the tongue of him, who, by self-praise, 
seeks to enhance his value in the eyes of others. — G. J. Bennett. 

Let falsehood be a stranger to thy lips. Shame on the policy that 
first began to tamper with the heart, to hide its thoughts. And doubly 
shame on that inglorious tongue that sold its honesty, and told a lie. 
— Havard. 

We Democrats of Texas are too much inclined at times to imagine 
that the party is the state. — The Author. 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 493 

Every lie, great or small, is the brink of a precipice, the depth of 
which nothing but Omniscience can fathom. — C. Reade. 

In fame's temple there is always to be found a niche for rich 
dunces, importunate scoundrels, or successful butchers of the human 
race. — Zimmerman. 

I know no real worth but that tranquil firmness which meets dan- 
gers by duty, and braves them without rashness. — Stanislaus. 

He that is much flattered soon learns to flatter himself. — Johnson. 

The party nominee who urges his nomination as against seriously 
developed after questions involving his official character and fidelity, 
who uses the party lash, and says that he may do with impunity what 
ordinary men may not do without violating their oflicial consciences, 
is afraid of his own record, or an ego-maniac — possibly both. — The 
Author. 

A fool flatters himself; the wise man flatters the fool. — Bulwer. 

A fool in high station is like a man on the top of a high mountain 
— everything appears small to him and he appears small to everybody. 

A fool always finds some greater fool to admire him. — Doileau. 

None but a fool is always right. — Hare. 

A fool can no more see his own folly than he can see his ears. — 
Thackeray. 



494 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 



CHAPTER XX. 
BAILEY AS A STANDARD OIL LOBBYIST. 

BAILEY RECEIVES $8,000 "LEGISLATIVE LOAN/' 

The witness, J. W. Bailey (continuing Com. Rept., p. 850) — 

Q. All right, now, just keep that before you for a few minutes, 
please, sir; what was that $8,000, a loan, or what was it, Senator? 

A. It was a loan. 

Q. When and under what circumstances was it negotiated? 

A. Well, I wanted the money and it was towards the close of the 
session that expired on the 4th of March, 1901, I remember very dis- 
tinctly that one Saturday night I went to New York to see Mr. Pierce. 
I saw Mr. Pierce and told him I wanted to borrow this money and ar- 
ranged with him while I was there to borrow it and when I went back 
to Washington — maybe the next day or a day or two afterwards, when- 
ever it was, I made out this note : 

Q. Did you get all the money at one time or different times? 

A. No, sir; I got the money as I needed it. At least I got it at 
different times. 

Q. Do you recall about the different amounts now, — the first 
amount? 

A. Well, I think I got a check for $1,250 at one time. I am 
rather inclined to think I got it before I sent him the note. I think 
I got it the day I arranged the loan and subsequently I got $1,750 of it. 

Q. How did you get that $1,750? 

A. I got it in New York Exchange; I got it on a letter that is 
among these papers. 

Q. Now, if you are correct in your belief, that the first payment 
on the $8,000 note was $1,250, and the next payment was the exchange 
for $1,750, that would make $3,000? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. When and how was the other $5,000 received by you on that 
note? 

A. Well, I could not undertake to say; I got it whenever I 
needed it; I drew it just as you would if you were to go to the bank and 
draw $8,000 — you get it when you need it. I didn't need it all at once 
and didn't get it all at once. 

Q. Well, now, the balance, or the other $5,000, or whatever the 
amount may be, are you certain that you got that all at once or at dif- 
ferent times. Senator? 

A. I am inclined to think I got that at once. Senator Odell. 

Q. Have you any opinion as to whether you got it by checks, 
draft, exchange or the money paid to you or how? 




HON. CULLKX F. THOMAS, 
Of Waco, Texas. 

Of whom H. Clay Pierce once said : "You are tny only stumbling block 
in Texas," and Mr. Thomas has always been justly proud of tlie fact. 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 495 

A. No, I know it wasn't the money paid to me because I would 
not have gotten $5,000 in money; I would have gotten a check or ex- 
change, and the chances are that I got it in Mr. Pierce's check. 

Q. Have you any definite idea, Senator, as to when you received 
this $8,000 — I mean as to when you received the balance of the $8,000 
note after the $1,750 exchange and the $1,250 that you think you re- 
ceived about the time the note was executed? 

A. No, sir; it wasn't very long because I generally had need of 
all the money at my command, and I am reasonably certain it wasn't 
very long. It was after the $1,750, however. 

[These statements by Bailey confirmed the author's charge No. 13 
that he telegraphed for $5,000 while en route to Texas to lobby before 
the Twenty-Seventh Legislature (the same legislature that had t^vo 
months before whitewashed and elected him to the Senate the first 
time). When this charge was prepared some one at Ft. Worth had 
written a prominent anti-Bailey member of the Thirtieth Legislature, 
giving data as to the name and address of the telegraph operator who 
formerly worked at Whitesboro, Texas, and who would testify that as 
Bailey was returning to Texas in March, 1900, he came into the tele- 
graph office at Whitesboro, and wired Pierce to send him immediately 
$5,000 in cash, to Austin, Texas. Now from Bailey's testimony, 
above quoted, it is evident that he did receive that $5,000, being a part 
apparently of the so-called $8,000 loan, and thus is shown, by Bailey's 
own testimony, that the charge about the $5,000 was true. The letter 
giving the data about the name and address of the telegraph operator, 
however, was lost and the proponent of the charges was unable, there- 
fore, to have him summoned as a witness.] 

BAILEY PAYS $8,000 BY TAKING A LARGER "LOAN." 

The witness Bailey (continuing p. 8i;i) — 

Q. Very well. Senator, has this $8,000 note ever been paid by 
you? 

A. It has. 

Q. In full? 

A. In full. 

Q. When was it paid and how? 

A. Well, I would not be certain exactly when it was paid, but I 
am certain how it was paid; it was paid out of a larger loan which I 
negotiated with the Bank of Commerce in St. Louis. 

Q. Do you remember about when that was Senator? 

A. Well, I would not be certain, Mr. Odell, whether it was be- 
fore or after the maturit}'^ of the note. 

Q. What was the amount of this loan, if you have no objection to 
stating — the larger loan that you speak of? 

A. I guess I ought not to have any objection. I have testified to 
my horse trades and everything else — the larger loan was between 
$24,000 and $25,000. 

The witness Bailey (continuing p. 827) — 



496 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

Q. Did you ever have any conference or communication with, 
conference with or communication from, J. D. Johnson with refer- 
ence to the McFall bill? 

A. No, I did not. 

Q. Well, with any of the agents or attorneys of the Waters- 
Pierce Oil Company, Senator Bailey? 

A. No, sir; absolutely none with any agent or attorney, and I 
don't recall that I ever discussed it with Mr. Pierce, though I am per- 
fectly sure that if I had met him anywhere while that bill was pend- 
ing I would have discussed it with him and he would have asked me 
about it. [As shown above, he did meet Pierce in New York "while 
that bill was pending," and taking his own word for it, he must "have 
discussed it with him." And immediately borrowed (?) $8,000 
from Pierce to be later merged into a "loan" of $24,000 or $25,000. 
It is believed that this larger so-called loan was the completion of pay- 
ment for Bailey's services as a lobbyist for the Waters-Pierce Oil 
Company before the 27th Legislature of 1901.] 

The witness Bailey (continuing on cross-examination, p. 941) — 

Q. Well, then how and when did you pay that note? [the 
$24,000 or $25,000 one?] 

A. I suppose you would then want me to state how I paid the 
next one. My recollection is that I paid half of that note and ex- 
tended half of it, but I am not perfectly sure, but what, when the next 
half matured, I negotiated it with a Washington bank. I do not 
know, do not remember just exactly how I paid that. It is not easy 
for a man who had many notes out to remember exactly how he pays 
them all. // / had known this inquiry ivas goin^ to be made I would 
have kept a record of them. 

Q. The material part if it is to know whether you paid any part 
of that note in services, or whether you paid it in money? 

A. Well, if I had paid it in services I had a perfect right to do it. 

I was opposed to it [The McFall bill] and I did what was neces- 
sary to defeat it and I would have stayed here until the end of the 
session if it had been necessary to defeat it, because it contained a 
declaration that the Waters-Pierce Oil Company had secured its re- 
admission into this State through a fraud, and I regarded that as a 
direct reflection on me and on Tom Smith and on Hardy. [So great 
was his "personal and political influence" at that time that it was not 
necessary for Bailey to stay at Austin "until the end of the session 
* * * to defeat it." It was "easy money" for him in those days 
of his financial necessity.] 

It [the McFall bill] wasn't worth the paper on which it was 
written in my judgment as a lawyer, and therefore it appeared to me 
that the sole and only purpose of it was to procure from that Legisla- 
ture a declaration that a fraud had been perpetrated and that I had 
participated in it. That was my sole and only reason for coming to 
Austin, and when I reached here, / found that my friends took the 
same view of it, and I didn't think it necessary to remain here, as I now 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 497 

recall, but a day. As soon as I talked with my friends, I found 
every one with whom I talked took precisely the same view of it, and 
there was no time to waste and I went away from here, as I recall now, 
to attend Tom Smith's funeral. I would have gone to that even if it 
had been necessary for me to return, but finding all my friends at 
agreement with me as to both the purpose aod validity of the bill, I 
did not deem it necessary to come back and I did not come back. 
\^He icas "working" his friends to a finish in those Jays.] 

The reason that I considered that a reflection on me, / had pub- 
licly and repeatedly stated that I had myself advised them to dissolve 
the offending corporation and organize a new one, and instead of in- 
tending to perpetrate a fraud on the laws of the State, I had advised 
that because that was the only course that could be pursued without 
violating the laws of the State. [In his letter to Attorney-General 
Davidson, December, 1906, Bailey said that he had nothing to do 
with "guiding and directing" the return of the Waters-Pierce Oil 
Company to Texas, — nothing more in fact, he said later, than a cer- 
tain Dallas lawyer had to do with "The salvation of immortal 
souls."] 

BAILEY LOBBIES FOR AVATERS-PIERCE OIL COMPAXY BEFORE THE TEXAS 
LEGISLATURE. 

The witness Bailey (continuing p. 871 ) — 

Q. When was your attention first called to the McFall bill, 
Senator Bailey? 

A. Well, Senator Odell, it must have been very soon after it was 
introduced. I don't know whether somebody wrote to me about it 
or I don't know whether I saw it in the newspaper, but I remember 
it was shortly after the [first] investigation, shortly after the investi- 
gation had been conducted and concluded here, and it related to the 
same matter, and I am sure it did not escape me very long because it 
distinctly declared that the re-admission was accomplished through 
a fraud and the imputation was that I and Tom Smith and D. H. 
Hardy were participants in the fraud. 

Q. Well, now% you say you do not recall who directed your at- 
tention to the McFall bill? 

A. No, sir, 

Q. Or its contents? 

_A. No, sir; I do not. [His memory was evidently bad on this 
point. There is no doubt in the author's mind but that Pierce, Jolin- 
son and Clark, jointly or severally, appealed to Bailey immediately 
when the McFall bill was introduced into the Texas Legislature on 
the 27th day of February, 1901.] 

Q. You have read the bill recently? 

A. No, sir; I don't suppose I have read it since then. In fact, 
I know I have not. 

Q. Now, from the time you left Austin, for instance, to return 
to Washington, after your election and up to the time of your return 



498 Senator J. W. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

to Austin, state whether or not you ever had any communications with 
Mr. H. C. Pierce with reference to the McFall bill. 

A. / don't think I did. If I had come in contact with Mr. 
Pierce while it was pending, I would have discussed it with him un- 
doubtedly. [In this connection, as in so many others, Bailey's own 
words convict him. On page 850 Mr. Bailey testified concerning the 
$8,000 "loan" and said "I wanted the money and it was towards the 
close of the session that expired on the fourth of March, 1901, I re- 
member very distinctly that one Saturday night I went to New York 
to see Mr. Pierce." The Grinnan Senate Bill was then pending and 
had been pending about 30 days, also the McFall bill was pending 
having been introduced on the 27th day of February. "I saw Mr. 
Pierce," said Mr. Bailey, on page 850 of his testimony, "and told 
him I wanted to borrow this money, and arranged with him, while I 
was there, to borrow it and * * * I vvent to back to Washing- 
ton." Bailey's $8,000 note to Pierce was dated Washington, D. C, 
March ist, 1901. Bailey took the oath as Senator on March 4, 1901, 
and shortly after returned to Texas. March 4th Pierce wrote Gruet 
"to deposit Company's check for like amount to my credit to 4th Na- 
tional Bank as I have given Bailey my check." March 6, 1901, Wa- 
ters-Pierce Oil Company issues its voucher for said $8,000 and 
March 28th Bailey wrote Pierce to send him New York exchange for 
$1,750 "payable to my order so that it will not be necessary for you 
to endorse it. Send it at once as I ought to have had it several days." 
April 7, 1901, Bailey reached Austin on a second trip, and presently 
all legislation, then pending adverse to the JVaters-Pierce Oil Com- 
pany, died a legislative death.] 

BAILEY FORCED TO ADMIT THAT $8,000 NOTE WAS CHARGED TO PROFIT 

AND LOSS. 

The witness Bailey (continuing p. 953) — 

Q. But if that had been discharged by services that would not 
have been here, would it ? 

A. Yes; I was entitled then to have my note returned to me the 
same as if I had paid it. To pay it in services is the same as to pay it 
in money. [?]*** 

I did demand it from Mr. Pierce; and he said he did not have it. 
It is inconceivable, Mr. Jenkins, that a man in charge of the accounts 
of the Waters-Pierce Oil Company, in authority over them, knowing, 
as Mr. Gruet says he knows, that the Standard Oil Company owned 
t\vo-thirds of that company and Pierce only one-third, that he would 
take an item which was against me and Pierce both and charge it ofif 
without making any attempt to collect it from me or from Mr. Pierce. 

Q. But if the statement as he makes it is that it was paid in ser- 
vices — 

A. Gruet does not make that statement. Gruet does not make 
any such statement as that. They charged it up on the books to legal 
— well, I do not know they charged to legal expense. They charged 
it to pro/it and loss. 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 499 

The witness Bailey (on cross-examination, p. 980) — 
Q. Have you made any investigation for that note since this con- 
troversy arose? 

A. No, sir; because since the investigation was ordered and be- 
fore the investigation was ordered I have not been away from the 
city of Austin. I have not examined my papers, and I will say to you 
frankly that I ivoiild not deem it necessary to ^0 and hunt a note to es- 
tablish the truth of what I said. [If he were innocent, would he not 
be willing, or should he not be willing, to show his humblest constit- 
uent the evidences of his innocence, though there should be but one of 
his constituents who should request it?^ 

BAILEY AS A LOBBYIST BEFORE THE TEXAS LEGISLATURE IN 1901. 

The Witness, J. D. Johnson : 

I was not in Austin during the session of the Texas Legislature in 
1901. I do not recall whether or not I talked with Mr. Bailey in re- 
gard to some measure in the Legislature — / must have talked with 
Mr. Pierce in regard thereto. I know of an $8,000 loan from Mr. 
Pierce to Mr. Bailey, [For lobbying before the Texas Legislature in 
the defeat of the McFall and Grinnin Bills directed at the Waters- 
Pierce Oil Company in 1901], only by hearsay. I know that Mr. 
Bailey said to Mr. Pierce that he had paid that note and that Mr. 
Pierce was to return the note that he could not find at the time. 
Mr. Pierce said he would look further and send it to Mr. Bailey. 
[Bailey was evidently anxious to get his $8,000 note back because it 
bore his signature, just as he was anxious to get back his first receipt 
to Pierce for $3,300 of date April 25th, 1900, and his signed draft 
paid by Waters-Pierce Oil Company for $1,500 of date June 15th, 
1900.] Mr. Pierce and Mr. Bailey said nothing about why the $8,- 
000 transaction passed into the books of the JVaters-Pierce Oil Com- 
pany. The IVaters-Pierce Oil Company was not lending money. Mr. 
Pierce did not consult with me about the propriety of passing a per- 
sonal matter of that kind into the books of the Waters-Pierce Oil 
Company. 

Yes, Mr. Pierce borrowed this $8,000 from the company to loan 
Mr. Bailey. [And never repaid the Company.] 

bailey defeats legislation in i90i adverse to oil trust. 

Senator Arch Grinnan 

a witness for the complainant, was sworn and testified (Bailey Invest. 
Com. Report, 1907, pp. 602-610) in substance as follows: 

The Twenty-Sixth Senatorial District is the one I represent; 
Brownwood is my residence town; was a member of the Twenty- 
Seventh Texas Senate and have been a member ever since. 

I introduced the bill in the Twenty-Seventh Legislature entitled: 
"An Act relating to fines, forfeitures and penalties due the State of 
Texas; to provide and to secure the payment thereof; to provide for 



500 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

the enforcement thereof against the corporations that have been or 
may be hereafter dissolved, and to provide for survival of causes of 
actions therefor." That was Senate bill 164. My bill met with op- 
position. Mr. Hanger— the same Mr. Hanger appearing here now 
as counsel for Mr. Bailey — brought in a minority report, just stat- 
ing that the bill do not pass. That was the first opposition to the bill. 

SENATOR BAILEY REACHES AUSTIN AND MORE OPPOSITION DEVELOPS. 

Senator Bailey came to Austin while this Legislation was pend- 
ing. I have some newspaper clippings which I cut out at the time 
and which have been in my possession ever since. The following 
clipping is from the Dallas News: 

"BAILEY ITS ENEMY." 

"Senator Said to be Coming Home to Fight the New Attack on 
the Oil Trust. His friends divided— Senator Reported to Regard 
the McFall Measure as an Attack on Himself. 

"Special to the News: Austin, Texas, March 11.— News has 
reached here that Senator J. W. Bailey left Washington today en- 
route for Austin. One of Mr. Bailey's warm friends in the House 
informs the News' correspondent that Mr. Bailey considers the 
Grinnan Senate Bill and the McFall House bill relating to the Wa- 
ters-Pierce Oil Company as an attack upon him, and that he is coming 
here to fight them. The Grinnan bill provides for a re-instatement 
of the penalty suits at Waco, which were dismissed by the district 
judge. The McFall bill declares that the permit of the oil company 
to do business in this State would be revoked. 

"That Mr. Bailey should oppose the passage of the McFall bill 
is not particularly surprising. A minority of the House Judiciary 
Committee No. i on the bill said: 'A reopening of this question is 
to be deplored as calculated to cause a renewal of the bitter political 
and personal controversy now fortunately settled.' 

"An interesting feature of the situation is that while some of Mr. 
Bailey's staunchest friends signed the minority report, others- 
staunch friends of the new Senator — voted to report the bill favor- 
ably. Mr. Bailey is expected to reach here Thursday, coming via 
St. Louis." 

The following clipping is from the San Antonio Express: 

"Senator Bailey explains his present mission. 

"Austin, Tex., March 15, (Special) : In reply to The Express 
correspondent's inquiry of what brought him to Austin at this time, 
the Hon. J. W. Bailey today dictated the following: 

" T came to Austin because a bill had been introduced in the 
House and favorably reported by a committee to revoke the permit 
of the Waters-Pierce Oil Company to do business in Texas upon the 
ground that it had procured its re-admission into the State by a fraud. 

" 7n view of the fact that I had advised the company to reorganize 
and come back into our State with clean hands and obey our laws, the 



The Political Life-Story of a Fallen Idol 501 

charge that its conduct is fraudulent is simply charging that I advised 
and assisted in the perpetration of a fraud. 

" 'I feel, and I am sure upon reflection my friends will agree with 
me, that when an act of mine is alleged to be in furtherance of a 
fraud upon the State of Texas, it is my duty to put myself in readi- 
ness to meet that kind of a charge. 

" 'Of course, it is absurd to say that a fraud was committed upon 
the law by a transaction that was as open as the day and according to 
law, and that this one was according to the law, these men themselves 
admit by applying to the Legislature instead of the courts.' " 

The following clipping was from the Dallas News: 

"Special to The News — Austin, Texas, March i ^.—United States 
Senator J. W. Bailey will leave for his home tonight. 

"The chances are that the McFall bill, to which Mr. Bailey re- 
fers, will not come up in the House unless Mr. Bailey's friends wish 
it. The bill is far down on the calendar and will hardly be reached 
in regular order before the adjournment. It can not be taken up out of 
order save by unanimous consent, or a vote of two-thirds of the House 
to make it a special order. It is understood that Mr. Bailey will not 
return to Austin soon, unless the bill should come up." 

The witness Grinnan (continuing) : 

Senator Potter was the Texas State Senator from Cooke County 
at that time. [Bailey's home county.] At first his attitude toward 
this bill was friendly. He came to me and told me he had just read 
the bill and was for it and would do what he could to pass it. Yes, 
sir; there was a change in his attitude after that; he was opposed to 
it. He voted for other dilatory measures to prevent its coming up 
and finally offered a substitute. The substitute practically eliminated 
Waters-Pierce Oil Company and also eliminated the penalties 
against individuals. I know Senator Bailey was here during or 
about that time. I remember this, that the friends of Senator Bailey 
began to align against the bill and oppose it. This was some time in 
March. Senator Potter changed his position after Senator Bailey 
came to Texas. The first thing I noticed was these statements in the 
paper and I cut these out just to see whether he was really going to op- 
pose my bill and / then saw the opposition of some of his friends who 
were opposing it and I understood they were opposing it because he 
was against it. 

SENATOR PAULUS WRITES BAILEY A LETTER IN CONNECTION WITH HIS 
OPPOSITION TO TEXAS LEGISLATION. 

The witness, Grinnan: 

I remember having a conversation with Senator Paulus and told 
him the effect Bailey's position would have on the bill and I saw no 
reason why he should fight this bill as it was a general bill, and Sena- 
tor Paulus suggested the writing of a letter, and I think he wrote him 
a letter. [The letter will be found on page 613, Bailey Invest. Com. 
Report, 1907, and is as follows] : 



502 Senator J. IV. Bailey of Texas Unmasked 

"Letter to Senator Bailey. Senator Paulus Wants to Know if he 
Opposes the Penalty Bill. 

Special to the News. Austin, Texas, March 26th. The follow- 
ing letter by Senator Paulus is self-explanatory: 

Austin, Texas, March 6, 1901. 
To Hon. Joe Bailey, Gainesville, Texas: 

Dear Sir: It is current among the members of the Legislature 
here that you are opposing and urging some of your friends to^oppose 
the passage of Senate Bill 164, introduced by Senators Griniian and 
Davidson, which provides a remedy for collection of fines, forfeitures 
and penalties due, and that may become due the State of Texas by per- 
sons and corporations. As this impression as to your opposition to 
this bill seems to have influenced some of your friends to oppose it, 
I feel that you should know the situation, and if, in fact, you are not 
opposed to this bill, you can state that fact and urge your friends to 
vote for it. If you do not believe the bill ought to become a law, 
please state fully your objection to it. As the close of the Legislature 
is so near, and as there is now an urgent necessity for an efficient 
remedy to enforce the anti-trust law of this State, I will give a copy of 
this letter to the daily press, and will ask you to please respond 
through the same channel so your friends may know in time your posi- 
tion. 

Yours truly, 

D. A. Paulus." 

Senator D. A. Paulus identified this letter under oath (Bailey In- 
vest. Com. Report, 1907, pp. 613-615), and also testified concerning it 
as follows : 

The witness Paulus: 

I suppose it [the letter] was intended to reflect on him [Bailey] ; 
to show the people he was here in Austin, if he was here, when he 
ought to have been in Washington City and to bring to the public the 
fact that he was opposing this bill. It was represented to me at the 
time that he was opposing it. The letter was published. I never 
saw a reply published at the time. 

QUERY.? 

If Oscar Stribling was worth $3,100 (payable months in advance) 
as a lobbyist for the Waters-Pierce-Standard Oil interests before the 
27th Texas Legislature, then was Senator Bailey not equally worth 
the $24,000 or $25,000 paid to him under the guise of, first, an 
$8,000 "loan," and, second, "a larger loan of $24,000 or $25,000?" 



